Not too long ago
there was a CIO who was involved in a cultural clash upwards and sideways in a
matrix organization. He supported multiple diverse business units across
multiple geographies; the business units had CIOs reporting into the respective
CEOs, they had limited accountability to the CIO. The CIO reported to the Group
CFO locally and the regional CIO functionally; the corporate IT function under
the leadership of the CIO supported all the business units across the
geographies.
The CIO had taken
over a team of submissive staff who never challenged the business CIO demands
for fear of conflict. While the overall matrix was a bit complex with differing
size and profitability of business entities, the equilibrium was largely
maintained with some give and take between the business units and corporate
functions. Chargeback was based on revenue as well as headcount; there was
occasional rumbling and murmuring which was subdued before it could raise an
ugly head.
So when the CIO
met the business units CXOs he was surprised at their aggression and attitudes;
it was justified that the business team will generate the demand and the
corporate will take care of the supply. Corporate IT was expected to take
orders based on what the business had decided as the direction and strategy to
deliver the systems and technology. It would have worked well except that the
timelines were rarely reasonable even when Corporate IT tried very hard.
Corporate IT was also
responsible for BAU systems, the data centre, applications and networking. The
divide reached morbid peaks during budget discussions; your cost is too high,
business cannot afford to pay increases every year; find efficiency was the
mandate. Scraping the bottom did not reveal much and that was unacceptable to
the business. If business is not growing, how can the expense grow ? Fair point
as any was, with business seeing a downturn, it is imperative to cut cost.
The difference was
that the business IT budgets grew while the cut was imposed on CIT budgets.
This led to frustration and thus the CIO sought arbitration from his boss the
Group CFO. That is when things started going out of hand; Business CIOs along
with their CEOs represented that we are a Profit Centre while you are a Cost
Centre; we pay for your existence and thus have the right to determine how you
work while you cannot challenge how we allocate resources. Ouch !
Determined not to
lose his temper the CIO silently looked at the CFO who gravely looked at his
phone avoiding eye contact. With no help available, the CIO took the challenge
head-on and suggested open book costing to get constructive feedback on what
can be optimized. This was rejected upfront that it was not for business to run
operational systems. Smiling the CIO offered a handover of all BAU systems to
respective business units to run and transfer resources too.
Taken aback the group
looked at each other; the CFO rose from his slumber to pacify and resolve; he
suggested that the groups step down from their positions and create a working
model that does not create conflict. The open book model was agreed to with
benchmarks with the external world. This was deemed an acceptable compromise.
His words on being a team and the need to work in harmony appeared hollow to
everyone, which he too realized.
This is not a
normal scenario in every matrix organization but some parts play out in every
company. It is difficult to align direction when measurement criteria are disjointed.
The open acknowledgement of team work towards success ensures that producers
and consumers do not see each other that way; rather they work to create an
ecosystem that motivates progress. Having been part of a few matrix structures,
I believe that finally the culture of the company (read CEO/Head) will
determine success.
If you have been
a part of a matrix and have stories to share, I would love to hear them.
Hi Arun, Extremely well put.. From the Vendor standpoint, I have observed that too much of Matrix orientation often leads to sub-optimal solutions and purchases aswell. And you nailed it, CIO / CIT personality drives the show there
ReplyDeleteAnu
Excellent read. The cost sharing needs to be based on a transparent model - the only solution.
ReplyDeleteExcellent read. The cost sharing has to be based on a transparent model - the only solution.
ReplyDeleteDear Arun, Very well articulated. I could immediately co-relate this to more than 3 or 4 big manufacturing companies in India. I work very closely with multiple IT team in those companies. Some of them avoid solving the problem under the garb of "Democracy in our organization".
ReplyDelete