The Founding Flaw of Matrix Organizing
Last year I was on a podcast with my friends at Zappi, and we got to talking about matrix orgs – there's an old bug inside the system, and it'll never go away.
How can we get more of what we want, and less of what we don't want, from where we work? How do we do that with intention? How do we allow for emergence?
47 PostsLast year I was on a podcast with my friends at Zappi, and we got to talking about matrix orgs – there's an old bug inside the system, and it'll never go away.
Because of course it does. That said, here's some research you can show your boss.
Excess management, Big-biz hiring stall, AI for organizing, Issues at Salesforce, and my thoughts on carve-outs 'n' central services.
The coming transfer from hierarchies of individuals to networks of teams, an exploration of executive comp, and a look back to the 1950s.
I think it's because of org structure and approval processes. Implications for marketing organizations abound.
Researchers examined +200k teams to see how performance is distributed. There's a LOT of poor-performing teams, and a lot more exceptional teams than expected!
Centralization isn't a good thing or a bad thing. It's a pendulum that swings back and forth, and the key is to centralize and decentralize with intention. And to learn from what you've done.
Pace Layers help visualize, distinguish, and discuss different kinds of work and teams within an organization. Here, I bring together a bunch of great thinking into a single construct. Enjoy!
RACI is vague, hard to use, and reinforces the "what the hell is happening here" status quo. DICE is specific, easy to use, and shines a bright light on dysfunction.
TL;DR: PowerPoint is a terrible tool for organization design, and we need a trusted alternative designed to match our values. And, sorry, leader-owned maps of reporting lines aren't the answer.
Hierarchy lets leaders learn more; it pushes the org to learn about itself, not about customers; it creates busywork. A network of teams is the answer.
Explaining why big, transformative top-down projects never seem to work, and two simple recommendations to fix the glitch: less strategy; more structure.