Case Study: Impact of Structure on M&M Accounting Firm Projects

This case study analyzes the organizational structure of Moss & McAdams accounting firm and its impact on project outcomes. It examines the firm's transition from a matrix organizational structure to a projectized organizational structure, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each. The study discusses the viability of these structures in the context of specific projects, focusing on the technical and sociocultural aspects. It also assesses the roles of key individuals like Sands and Crosby, evaluating their mastery of both project dimensions. The case study concludes that a better understanding of organizational strategy and structure is crucial for improving project outcomes and overall firm performance. Desklib offers similar solved assignments for students.

Running head: MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
Moss and McAdams Accounting Firm
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
Introduction
The following essay would feature a case study to testify what happens when a
company do not realize the appropriate implementation of organizational structure. The
situations that the company has been in due to this would be described with proper
justifications below with the descriptions of the organizational structures.
Functional organizational structure
The functional organizational structure is a typical type of organizational structure
where the organization is further divided into sub-groups based on the functional areas of the
organizations, like IT, marketing, finance and others.
Strengths
 Focus on Specialization
 Operational Speed
 Operational Clarity
Weaknesses
 Segregation
 Weakening of the bonds common to each other
 Lack of Coordination
 Territorial Disputes
Matrix Organizational Structures
This is an organizational structure that mostly focuses upon the reporting relationship
structure of the company based upon matrices or grids, not following the formal or traditional
forms of organizational hierarchy (Winnubst, 2017).
Strengths
 Clear articulation about project objectives
 Proper integration of functional objectives and project objectives
 Efficient use of limited human resources
 Rapid and proper information flow within the system

2MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
Weaknesses
 Problems in understanding the company hierarchy
 Increase in organizational complexity
 Increase in management overhead costs
Projectized organizational structures
This is an organizational structure where the company organizes the activities via
programs or portfolios to implement them throughout projects.
Strengths
 Clear line of authority
 Shorter lines of communication
 Less time consumption
 Good communication and cooperation
 Versatile and flexible process
Weaknesses
 Behaviour of project manager can be arrogant as he or she has full authority of
the projects
 Tight schedule with stressful environment
 Multiple projects induce poor communication
 Cost of employees and equipment can be higher
Organizational structure used in the two projects
The first case that was started in the M&M firm had been the situation where there
was an accounts manager called Palmer within the organization, but he never regarded the
other employees as lesser in authority (Lock, 2017). They all were approachable and so was
the business information easily spread amongst the entire organization not considering the
hierarchical levels. Therefore, the organization follows the Matrix Organizational Structure in
this regard.
In the second case, when Sands contacted Palmer, he could see that the company now
followed the orders of Palmer without getting on with the business. Therefore, it can be said

3MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
that by that time, the organization had shifted from the Matrix Organizational Structure to
Projectized Organizational Structure.
Degree of viability of the use of organizational structure as per the case study
In the first case, where the company and its accounting system was hampered due to
the absence of Olds and the effect was seen right at the first week, it could be said that the
projects could have been managed better using a different type of organizational structure.
The next case, where the project formulated the Projectized Organizational Structure,
situations were much simpler to handle the entire system (Harrison & Lock, 2017). This is
because, the understanding of authority was not clear to the people involved within the
project and thus the information and the knowledge transfer was difficult to handle. The
Projectized Organizational Structure could have been better in handling this.
Technical side of a project: This clarifies that the entire project depends upon the
technical issues in a process that is required to be considered for successfully completing the
project (O'Neill, Beauvais & Scholl, 2016).
Sociocultural side of a project: The sociocultural sides of a project defines the entire
approach regarding the management of a project.
Viability of Sands and Crosby as masters of both sides of their projects
According to the case study, Sands can be regarded as the master in both his aspect of
the project but Crosby cannot be regarded as a master. This is because; the Crosby has
abandoned his sociocultural responsibilities from his side, but Sands was true to his
sociocultural and technical responsibilities right from the beginning.
Reasons for the organization to opt a better strategy for organizational structure
It is viable that a better knowledge of the strategy of the organization would have
improved the outcome of this case study. This is because the understanding of proper strategy
of the organization was lacking in the people described in the case except for Sands, and this
created all the problems in the projects (Ashkenas et al., 2015). This is why having a proper
understanding about the organization and its strategies would have been sufficient to make
sure that the company follows proper organizational structure.

4MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
Conclusion
Therefore, in conclusion it can be said that the entire problem described in the case
study had been about the wrong decisions taken about choosing the appropriate
organizational structure for the entire organization to follow. If only, the organization and the
executives understood the situation about the problems that the company was facing due to
the wrong implementation of the organizational structure, it would have a much better and
manageable situation.

5MOSS AND MCADAMS ACCOUNTING FIRM
Reference
Ashkenas, R., Ulrich, D., Jick, T., & Kerr, S. (2015). The boundaryless organization:
Breaking the chains of organizational structure. John Wiley & Sons.
Harrison, F., & Lock, D. (2017). Advanced project management: a structured approach.
Routledge.
Lock, D. (2017). The essentials of project management. Routledge.
O'Neill, J. W., Beauvais, L. L., & Scholl, R. W. (2016). The use of organizational culture and
structure to guide strategic behavior: An information processing perspective. Journal
of Behavioral and Applied Management, 2(2), 816.
Winnubst, J. (2017). Organizational structure, social support, and burnout. In Professional
burnout (pp. 151-162). Routledge.