Matrix Management Magazine
Almost every leader these days is leading a project or initiative, which makes sense if you consider that anything you want to achieve in an organization is actually accomplished through projects.
But when they get delayed or fall apart, it leaves people disengaged and feeling overworked.
Have you been there?
RACI charts are not only outdated technology, they actually reinforce the wrong kinds of organizational behavior. If you want agility, engagement, and even innovation, stop using RACI charts, now!
As you’re sizing up that new project initiative that’s very important to your company, you anxiously start thinking about who needs to be involved, and you pull them into a meeting.
Everyone is excited about this initiative (even though they have a lot on their plates already) so everyone gets to work to make it happen. It’s going to be fantastic for the organization—and for you personally!
And then something happens. Could be another leader’s project takes precedence. Or others get behind because of the other tasks they have to complete first. Or even an unexpected cost comes up that throws you out of budget.
And you start thinking—this is going to reflect poorly on me as the project leader. Could I get fired over this?
As more organizations strive to increase their agility and to promote cross-functional collaboration, the budgeting process, unfortunately is often overlooked. This process in and of itself is a management system, one that can either support or stymie delivering organizational goals in an integrated and agile way.
Many leaders have invested years in getting promoted up the organizational chain of command. Such upward mobility has long served as the yardstick by which corporate success has been measured, an ingrained mindset that dates back to the 1950s.
Organizations depend upon accountability systems to make things happen. Basing performance reviews upon employees’ ability to meet specific goals offers a clear-cut way of rewarding them for a job well done. More often, however, accountability focuses on assigning blame when things don’t go well.
In 2016, U.S. corporations spent nearly $162 billion on employee training and education. However, this investment rarely improves organizational performance, a reality experienced by many companies and explored in the Harvard Business Review article “Why Leadership Training Fails—and What to Do About It.”
It’s no secret that companies sometimes do crazy things. Shows like The Office and the comic strip Dilbert have become cult classics because they reflect corporate dysfunction with horrifying and hilarious accuracy.
Smashing functional silos has become a rallying cry in management circles, especially during the past decade. The pain points behind this leadership imperative go back nearly 30 years, when Phil Ensor coined the phrase “functional silo syndrome” to describe common challenges in manufacturing organizations. Since then, the crippling effects of workplace silos have worsened, magnified by the disruptive effects of technology, yet many companies are no closer to overcoming these organizational difficulties.
In 2004, the Joint Special Operations Task Force—a collection of the best special operations units in the world—found itself consistently outmaneuvered by Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). Despite a 40-year track record of amazing achievements, superior training and funding, the Task Force could not compete against a scattered, local insurgency.
Similar battles are waged daily in Corporate America, as iconic brands and industry leaders struggle to retain market share against a rising tide of small, nimble competitors.