Solving organisational conflicts in public matrix organisation

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the matrix organisation in one municipality. It focusses on whether decisions can be based on shared understanding, as well as identifying conflicts and proposed solutions between central administration and the line divisions. Design/methodology/approach The case study is founded on empirical data from city of Turku, Finland. The data are based on two surveys and participant observation data (employees’ meetings and workshops during 2013-2015). Findings Conflicts were categorised based on structure, processes, resources, people, and rewards. Conflicts emerged on an individual level, such as role conflict, role ambiguity, and role overload. Administrative procedures, personnel resources, scheduling, and personality issues emerged on an organisational level. Conflicts were greater in the line organisation than in central administration, but they did not differ much. Proposed solutions were few, but jointly determined. The value of the matrix was in the creation of a coherent vision. Cross-dimensional steering groups offered fora for identifying problems and solving conflicts, but the ability to realise change was limited, mainly because of a lack of decision-making power. Research limitations/implications Methodological limitations relate to the generalisation of the findings. Practical implications The study findings call for developing network-based communication models, as well as public management styles adjusted to matrix-type organisations. Originality/value The conflicts raised are similar in public-sector organisations and private companies. However, the proposed solutions may vary because of the limited possibilities for a municipal organisation to rectify the problems that emerged.

Outsourcing Strategies in Public Services under Budgetary Constraints: Analysing Perceptions of Public Managers

“…"While outsourcing reduces the role of government in delivering public services, government retains control over the contracting process" (Vyas et al, 2018). Unlike the private initiative, public organizations involve complex and multidimensional goals, encompassing, for example requirements such as equality and efficiency (Pakarinen & Virtanen, 2016). The reduction or discontinuation of activities, even if they are outsourced -not constituting core competences -represents a significant threat to business continuity (Niemimaa et al, 2019).…”

Ambiguity in public sector performance measurement: a systematic literature review

“…One of the antecedents of role ambiguity is related to the organizational structure (e.g. the matrix organizational structure): when it generates an imbalance between responsibility and power and creates a need for multiple reporting relationships, conflicting expectations, excessive demands, role overload or authority conflicts (Pakarinen and Virtanen, 2016), it increases role ambiguity.…”

“…, 2011, 2012). Improving communication quality emerges as a solution to reduce role ambiguity, together with role specification, clear work distribution between central administration and managers, task prioritization and coordination (Pakarinen and Virtanen, 2016).…”

“…Main consequences include increased employees' turnover intentions , dissatisfaction, sense of losing control at work, perceptions of poor work quality, low productivity, frustration and a weakened psychological contract with and among employees (Pakarinen and Virtanen, 2016), employees' affective commitment (identification with organizational goals), and value and normative commitment (sense of obligation to the organization) (Addae et al, 2008;Reid et al, 2008;Baraldi et al, 2010). We may also recall reduced job satisfaction (Reid et al, 2008;Jung, 2014a, b) and reduced employee empowerment (Skrinou and Gkorezis, 2020).…”

“…Also, the quality of communication can affect such ambiguity: high quality communication between supervisors and subordinates and between colleagues can reduce role ambiguity (Brunetto et al, 2011(Brunetto et al, , 2012. Improving communication quality emerges as a solution to reduce role ambiguity, together with role specification, clear work distribution between central administration and managers, task prioritization and coordination (Pakarinen and Virtanen, 2016).…”