Unlike many reimagining of the management paradigm, the MWT Model is not anti-hierarchy.
In fact, there is an unavoidable hierarchy of responsibility that serves organisations well – and it is only distorted through managers (and other groups) trying to escape it.
The MWT Model doesn’t suggest that hierarchies don’t exist – rather it suggests that Collaboration Architectures must be clear and transparent.
The New MWT Hierarchy provides a suggestion that the governance hierarchy of an organisation should mirror the business capability map at the top level, followed by clear distinctions that:
- Separate management from measurement
- Create hierarchies of leaders
- Create effective peer relationships across short and long term objectives
- Manage resources as bundles of capability
- Leave space for specialised solution architectures (both technology and non-technolgy solutions)
This approach balances stability versus change, and business capability ownership with a subordinated functional ownership. The MWT Future Firm extends this idea with specific digital business capabilities to include in the governance hierarchy.
Blog posts relating to The New MWT Hierarchy:
- The end of IT alignment The language of IT alignment has to end. It’s no longer serving any purpose except to isolate disciplines that no longer need to be managed in isolation. The convergence of the commoditisation of IT and the socialisation of business means that IT in its strictest purest sense has won. Paradoxically it also makes IT completely unimportant ...
- Project Managers Should Not Fear the Baseline | CIO – Blogs and Discussion There is some wisdom in Jim Vaughan’s article and the related comments: The poor performance of the project usually has less to do with the project manager or the project team and more to do with the systemic failures of the organizational culture to provide the proper tools and governance to allow the projects to succeed. ...