Re: Organizations with two or more Managers

"DBMS_Plumber" <paul_geoffrey_brown_at_yahoo.com> writes:
> Actually, I believe it to be the norm. (Learnt this while failing to
> pursuade an ERP to use SQL tree encodings.)
>
> Google("Matrix Management")
>
> The idea is that employees have a role, and a set of skills. You
> compose a project team out of people with different skill sets (you
> call the team lead the Project Manager) but you also need to manage
> people according to their skills (called your Functional Manager).
> Think about how many DBAs and programmers report to both their own
> "boss" and the managers of the projects they're involved in. More
> projects, more skills; more managers.
>
> It might be OK if the management chain was hierarchical, but that ain't
> so. Project managers might have responsibility for several projects,
> some of which involve the same individual contributors.
>
> What's worse, it ain't even a-cyclic! An individual might be a
> contributor on project A, a manager of project B, and manage people
> with certain skills in role C, one of whom is the manager of project A!
> The landscape of modern business organizations is less and less
> 'command and control' and more and more 'social networking with shared
> goals and responsibilites.'

boyd's talk organic design for command and control, i sponsored boyd's talk at sjr ... about the time system/r tech transfer was going on from sjr to endicott for sql/ds.

misc. reference:
http://www.belisarius.com/modern_business_strategy/boyd/organic_design/organic_design_frameset.htm

lots of boyd references
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subboyd.html#body

-- 
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/