The Matrix System at Work - Independent Evaluation Group - World ...

CHAPTER 5
INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
making the sector units responsible for the quality of global technical practices
without clarifying the division of responsibilities among sector directors and sector
managers. While all five roles may be essential for sector coherence, it does not
follow that all the accountabilities should lie with the Sector Board and sector
managers and none with the sector directors. However, given the range of sectors
overseen by current sector directors, especially in SDN, any readjustment would
have to be accompanied by an examination of the configuration of networks and
network size.
Span of Control in the Regions
5.18 As does every large organization, the Bank must meet the three major
criteria of an efficient structure: non-overlap, non-fragmentation, and a
manageable span of control (Oakerson 1989). 63 Non-overlap implies that two or
more units should not have the same authority to act in the same circumstances;
non-fragmentation allows aligning authority with responsibility; and span of control
calls for manageable organizational size. There are inevitable tradeoffs among the
three criteria. In particular, small unit sizes tends to lead to inter-unit coordination
problems and risks of incoherent policy, and large unit sizes entail intra-unit
coordination problems and risks of inefficient and unaccountable implementation.
The challenge of finding the right balance among the three criteria is particularly
complex in a matrix organization because such balance must be found on both the
“technical” and the “client” sides of the matrix.
SPAN OF CONTROL OF SECTOR MANAGERS
5.19 The unrealistic span of control and multitude of responsibilities of sector
managers in the Regions makes it unlikely that they can either devote sufficient
attention to quality assurance and people management or contribute effectively to
Sector Board functions. A 2009 study by Bank management reported that the span
of control 64 in the Bank was 23 staff per manager, which was already much higher
than comparator organizations, which were in the range of 7-15 staff per manager.
The study found that sector managers had the most acute span of control problem
with an average of 34 staff per manager in 2009, which also affects their ability to
contribute effectively to Sector Board functions. This evaluation found that at the
end of FY11, the average staff per regional sector manager was 37, 65 more than three
times the average for comparator organizations, and compared to 19 at IFC
(Appendix L). Although the number of staff to be managed is only one aspect of the
workload, this alone renders it highly unlikely that regional sector managers can
participate meaningfully in their Bank-wide role on Sector Boards. As one former
sector manager said, “The overload of sector managers and many staff is ridiculous.
88