評論
打印
OK. And...and that's probably the primary reason for functional organization right there—is that we want some engineering consistency.
好了。那可能是功能性組織存在的首要原因——我們需要一些工程一致性。
We want the same kind of technology used in all four cars.
我們想要四款車里都有同樣的科技。
If we disperse those four engineers into four parts of the organization and they work by themselves,
如果我們把四個工程師分散到該公司的四個部分，讓他們獨自工作，
there's a lot less chance that the technology's gonna be the same from car to car.
車與車之間技術一樣的可能性就小多了。
So instead we maintain the functional organization—that means the engineers work together in one part of the building.
所以我們保持著功能性組織——那意味著工程師們在大樓的一個部分一起工作。
And their offices are next to each other because we want them to talk to each other.
而且他們的辦公室彼此比鄰，因為我們希望他們能與彼此交談。
When an engineer works on a project, they bring the expertise of their whole functional group with them.
當一個工程師致力于一個項目時，他們有著整個功能性組織的專長。
But there's a downside of that though, isn't there? I mean, organizing a company into functional groups is not all positive.
但是也有不利的一面，不是嗎？我是說把公司組織成功能性群組并不是沒有負面影響的。
Where's the allegiance of those engineers? It's to their coordinator, right?
那些工程師的忠誠在哪里？他們忠誠于其協調者，對嗎？
It's to that chief engineer. But we really want our one engineer, the engineer that's working on car number one,
是對總工程師的忠誠。但是我們真的很希望工程師一，致力于新車一號的工程師，
we want that person's loyalty to be to that project as well as to the head of the engineering group.
希望那個人忠誠于工程部門的頭兒時也能忠誠于那個項目。
We...we really want both, don't we?
我們兩樣都想要，不是嗎？
We want to maintain the functional organization, so we can maintain uniformity and technology transfer, and expertise.
我們想要保持功能性組織，才能保持一致性以及科技和專長的傳播。
We want the cutting edge expertise in every group.
我們希望每個組里都有尖端專長。
But at the same time we also want the engineer to be totally dedicated to the needs of the project.
但同時，我們也希望工程師能完全致力于其項目的需要。
Ideally, we have a...a hybrid, a combination of both functional and project organization.
理論上，我們有一個合成物，一個功能性和項目組合的組織。
But there's a problem with this kind of hybrid structure.
但是這種混合的結構有一個問題。
When you have both functional and project organization, well, what does that violate in terms of basic management principles?
當你功能性和項目性組織都有的時候，涉及到基本管理原則的時候，會違背什么？
Unity of command.
指揮統一原則。
Unity of command. That's exactly right. So this...this is a vicious violation of unity of command, isn't it?
指揮統一原則。非常正確。這嚴重地違反了指揮統一原則，不是嗎？
It says that this engineer working on a project seems to have two bosses.
就像這個工程師致力于一個項目卻有兩個老板。
We...we got the engineering boss, and we got the project manager boss.
我們有工程頭兒，也有項目經理頭兒。
But the project manager is responsible for the project, and is not the official manager of the engineer who works on the project.
但是項目經理對項目負責，而且他不是致力于這個項目的工程師的正式經理。
And we try to maintain peace in the organizations and sometimes it's disrupted and we have conflicts, don't we?
我們努力保持組織內的和平，但是有時候和平瓦解我們會有沖突，不是嗎？
The project manager for car one wants a car part to fit in a particular way, for a specific situation, a specialized case.
車一號的項目經理因為一個特定的情況，特殊案例，想要一個車部件以特殊的方式嵌入。
Well, the, uh, engineering director says no, we gotta have standardization.
而工程總監說，不行，我們要標準化。
We gotta have all the cars done this way.
我們所有的車都要這樣完成。
We can't make a special mold for that particular part for that particular car.
不能為那個特定車的特殊部分做一個專門的磨具。我們不會那樣做。
We're not gonna do that. So we got a conflict.
所以我們就有了沖突。
