1 “Moss and McAdams Accounting Firm” in your textbook. Once you have finished reading the case study, you will address the prompts below.
1. Define functional, matrix, and projectized organizational structures, and list the strengths and weaknesses of each.
2. Determine which organizational structure was being used in the two projects discussed in the case study, and explain how you came to that conclusion using evidence from the case study.
3. Do you believe that the projects described in this case study could have been managed better using a different type of organizational structure? If so, which one do you think would have worked better, and why? If you believe that the organizational structure used was the correct one, explain why you think so.
4. Describe what is meant by the technical side of a project and the sociocultural side of a project. Do you think Sands and Crosby were masters of both sides of their projects? Why, or why not?
5. Do you believe that a better knowledge of the organization’s strategy would have improved the outcome of this case study? Why, or why not?
Having reviewed the case study, let’s delve into the key concepts and address the prompts:
The case study suggests a matrix structure. Here’s the evidence:
A stronger functional structure might have improved efficiency for routine tax preparation. Dedicated tax teams with clear functional leadership could streamline processes. However, it might lack the flexibility needed to handle diverse client needs and could slow down response to changes in tax regulations.
The current matrix structure offers a balance, allowing for specialization while enabling project-specific collaboration.
Sands and Crosby likely excelled in the technical side, given their accounting expertise. However, the case study suggests challenges with the sociocultural aspects:
A deeper understanding of the firm’s strategy would have benefited the case study in two ways:
Conclusion
The Moss and McAdams case study highlights the importance of choosing the right organizational structure for project management. While the current matrix structure offers some flexibility, potential improvements lie in better addressing the sociocultural aspects of project management and aligning project selection with the firm’s overall strategy.