The disadvantage of matrix management is that employees can become confused due to conflicting loyalties. The belief is that a properly managed cooperative environment can neutralize these disadvantages. Overall, matrix management typically thought to be an outdated method to organize a company The belief in the 70's and 80's was that a matrix organization would be the best way to manage project complexity. It has been proven to not be true over the years by the failures of companies such as IBM, HP, and AT&T. A matrix organization in itself is complex, breaks down over time, and hinders the ability of managers to effectively lead.
Chat with our AI personalities
ya yes its there a matrix called zero matrix
A matrix organization is a structure that reflects the complexity of the modern business environment of multiple (often competing) priorities. In the past organizations often had a functional organization inside a particular geography - so the US Marketing manager for a product - say widgets, worked for the US marketing VP who reported to the US President. In a matrix, companies realize that there are different and sometimes competing priorities driven by function, geography, business unit, customer segment etc.. etc.. So that same US Marketing person today may have a reporting line to the Marketing functional head, to the Business line head for widgets, to the US geographic head for profit and loss etc… A matrix then is an orgnaization structure with multiple reporting lines. But the structure itself solves nothing, it just lays out the problem more clearly, I think that all the value of the matrix lies in the way people work together to resolve daily conflicts and trade-offs
A sparse matrix is a matrix in which most of the elements are zero.
A zero matrix is a matrix in which all of the entries are zero.
a squar matrix A is called involutary matrix. if A^2=I