Before the 1970s, large companies used to work in “silos.” This designation refers to groups of workers operating in different fields and responds to the line or functional managers. You can get an idea of whether the process of displaying multiple columns on a page. Each is headed by a supervisor and manager of each line is headed by a single worker in the group. Since these groups were mostly isolated and autonomous, as a result some features work doubled for each silo.

For example, an enterprise information technology software developers can have the customer service department, the department of finance, and development teams, because each of these divisions are needed computer programmers to meet their job requirements.

During the 1970s, companies began working to improve the organization’s operations, and this resulted in the development of a matrix structure.

A matrix organization employs a structure that uses functional managers, in other words, managers who lead groups of employees who have similar functions. In the previous example of a technology company, all computer programmers are in a department in a single manager. The department will conduct the majority of programming for the company.

In this type of organization, workers are categorized according to their abilities and grouped in silos. This can be compared with the columnar organization of a matrix. A dedicated manager and heads of each silo workers in his group to submit a report and are accountable to him. The responsibilities of this manager include the promotion of its employees, the departmental budget, and administrative oversight of the silo.

With what we have covered so far, may seem to a parent organization and a traditional company structures are similar except for the categorization of each silo workers based on their functions. Another notable exception between the two is that a parent is ordered in rows or lines that extend through each column.

Traditional organizations have worked well, but were very inefficient. Within the company that many people have the same knowledge. Project management situations revealed its greatest weakness, however. Instead of working directly for the head of project each team member worked with a supervisor in a functional area. This was clearly the way to confusion and ultimately failure.

On the other hand, consider an organization of groups of workers with the completion of each set of specific functions under the supervision of a functional manager. Think of each group of workers as a column and then extends through the ranks to envision these columns each row representing a specific project led by a project manager. The workers of a certain group, where a row and column intersection then report to the functional manager responsible for the column and the project manager responsible for that row. A project is then in groups of workers reporting to the various functional managers, while reporting to a project manager.

With this type of organizational structure, the tensions between project managers and functional managers are present. Because each administrator has a duty to perform, and these tasks must be performed by workers shared by both parties, a conflict of interest occurs naturally.

There are many different types of parent organizations, but they all have the common goal of trying to create each manager of the specific operational needs with a balance of power.