The organization chart is generally your first stop
for finding out who's in charge. A
new employee
or a contractor may receive an org chart as part of an
orientation packet or employee manual. This system
does have its weaknesses:
- An org chart generally illustrates line management,
not project management.
- The interrelationships shown in the chart may not
really be as they appear. For example, sometimes
influence or perspective may be found more strongly
among workers than their managers.
- You may be isolated from those higher up on the
chart, so even if they have influence or perspective,
you don't benefit.
- If you've received a copy in an employee manual or
as the result of some event (e.g. hiring, transfer,
etc.), the chart could be outdated. These charts
tend to change often.
We used to joke that a new [NASA field center] phone book
was a signal of an imminent reorganization.
- A typical org chart may give the organization's
name, code, management titles and names. Those
pieces of information are necessary for the chart
to have value, but they may not be sufficient.
- Management style isn't represented on the chart.
Different organizations offer employees different
levels of autonomy in decisionmaking. This is
almost impossible to illustrate graphically, and
few organizations would go to the trouble.
- The organization's responsibilities and/or
products are seldom represented on the chart.
The org chart is still the most commonly-used first
means of finding out who can help you. If it did
nothing else at all, it would in general give you
some idea where the organization's resources (e.g.
money and staff) come from. To access these
resources -- especially to initiate change -- you
need to know who to talk to.
Change to some business function may be driven by
- increasing need for manual intervention or
service
- the function changing or going away
- a champion (or an opponent) of the function
leaving or transferring
The org chart is unlikely in and of itself to reveal
whether these things are likely to occur, but it may
tell you who would be in a position to know. Someone
on that chart can also tell you how to overcome
resistance to change (if that resistance can be
overcome).
Contributor Comments
One reason this document can be important is that
communicating the idea of developing a new solution
to a problem is not just finding an optimal answer
that already exists to be discovered, but often
rather involves a conversion of the beliefs and
attitudes of all the people who are a part of
the system.
Sometimes the people that can be most beneficial in a
company when trying to discover requirements aren't even
on the organzational chart. I think the point is that it
is a good place to start.
Typically, the lower I go in the ladder the more
information I will gather regarding a system's
usability, problems, needs etc. The higher I go
the more I will hear about constraints, policy,
economical considerations, job descriptions,
approval/denial, etc.
What You Can Do
You have to use the chart with care:
- Make sure it's up to date.
(And don't trust the other engineers or managers
to know. The secretary is the one who knows!)
- Find descriptions of the organizations
represented on the chart if those descriptions
are available.
- Before advocating change, identify the
real flow of power. It may not be as
given on the chart. There's usually a difference
between someone who has authority and someone
who has power.
|