In a matrix organization, team members report to more than one leader or manager at the same time, typically a functional leader and a business or regional leader.
This creates a grid-like system of accountability instead of a single straight line of reporting. Think of a finance team in a centralized function (Corporate Finance), but with individual team members who work within a business unit (the Finance Head in that unit).
A Weak Matrix is where the functional leader dominates, and the project or daily task leader has limited authority.
A Strong Matrix is where the project leader has primary authority and the functional leader mainly manages strategy and resource allocation.
In a Balanced Matrix, the functional and project leaders share authority relatively equally.
The key to understanding how to navigate a matrix organization is to discern which of the three designs drives how leaders engage.
Matrix organizations are thought to be more nimble, allowing leaders to solve emerging problems faster, quickly allocate resources to where they are most needed, and to shift people and their skills to projects where they can add the most value.
Businesses and enterprises that face fast-changing markets and other external conditions benefit the most from this design.
Leading in a matrix organization requires a stronger emphasis on influence, collaboration, and negotiation than a traditional hierarchy.
Because leaders share people, decisions, and resources with other leaders, they must resolve conflicting priorities with peers directly.
Success often depends on influencing without authority, negotiating tradeoffs, and securing buy-in from people who do not formally report to the leader.
The impact of decisions on other functions, regions, and projects must always take precedence over simply making a call. Because the leaders co-own outcomes and accountability, they need to follow how the culture dictates resolving conflicts and setting priorities.
Those inexperienced with a matrix organization often struggle to navigate the subtle and not-so-subtle negotiations that are the norm in such an organizational design.
Instead of dictating solutions to problems, leaders in a matrix must learn to guide the group to decisions. It takes political and organizational savvy to navigate the formal and informal power structures that reside in the matrix.
Of the many influence strategies critical to effective leadership in a matrix organization, informational power stands out. By gathering and sharing information, leaders show themselves to be credible sources and important to others’ success.
Unlike expert power (based on skill) or authority power (based on position), informational power comes from having access to valuable information and using it effectively.
Good leaders in a matrix share information to build trust by explaining the why behind their requests, reducing uncertainty by offering timely updates, presenting data in a way that highlights the benefits of a proposed action, gathering data and evidence to support a plan or strategy, offering insights and perspectives to increase buy-in, and marshaling benchmarks and metrics to make a convincing case.
Informational power is essential in all leadership, but especially in fast-changing organizations where influencing without authority is critical.
People need data, insight, and intelligence to do their jobs.
Leaders in a matrix think of themselves as an information hub and conduit to others. The more information and data they gather and share, the more influential they become.
