8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:30 PM Page 1.

CHAPTER 1.2
THE PLANT ENGINEERING
ORGANIZATION
William V. Jackson
President, H.H. Felton & Associates
Dallas, Texas

ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 1.7

Three Types of Organizations 1.8
THE ROLE OF THE FIRST-LINE SUPERVISOR 1.11
Factors Affecting the Supervisor’s Role 1.11
A Developmental Model 1.11
DESIGN OF THE PLANT ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION 1.13
Plant Start-Ups 1.13
Transition to a Team Organization 1.13
Creating a Real Team Organization 1.13
Pseudoteams 1.14
Plant Engineering in a Matrix Organization 1.14
REFERENCES 1.14

In 1983, when the first edition of the Standard Handbook of Plant Engineering was published,
a discussion of the structure of the plant engineering organization would have been straight-
forward. Organizational design parameters would have centered on the size of the plant, the
relative size of the maintenance organization in relation to the other departments, and the
complexity of the equipment and processes to be maintained. Alternative designs would have
been limited to variations of a traditional, functionally oriented structure.
Today, however, it seems that all organizations, large and small, are replacing traditional
organizations with multiskilled teams working together. Self-directed work teams are taking
over the responsibilities formerly given to the first-line supervisors, who, by the way, have
now become team resources. Empowerment has been the management buzzword since the
1990s.
Plant engineering organizations are not immune to the changing roles of workers, first-
line supervisors, and even upper management. Service organizations, like plant engineering,
are frequently caught in the middle between the movement away from recognition of func-
tional excellence (and the resulting organizational structure), and the functional expertise
required to keep equipment and processes running at ever-increasing levels of quality and
reliability.

ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

Before discussing plant engineering organizations in detail, it is necessary to begin with an

overview of organization design in a broader sense. The three basic ways to organize will be
discussed, and the effect on each of these of the changing role of the first-line supervisor will
be analyzed.

1.7
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.8

1.8 THE PLANT ENGINEER AND THE ORGANIZATION

Three Types of Organizations1

Organizations can be structured by grouping together individuals with the same general work
specialty (functional organization), collecting them by the output of the organization (prod-
uct or project team organization), or a mixture of both types (the matrix organization). Each
type of organization has its strengths and weaknesses.

Functional Organization. This is the traditional structure for plant and plant engineering
organizations. All of the technical personnel (engineering and maintenance) are grouped
together. Although within the plant engineering organization there may be some small pro-
ject teams, for the most part the organization is structured functionally. Figure 1.1 shows an
example of a plant functional organization.

FIGURE 1.1 Functional plant organization.

Common characteristics of the functional organization are as follows:

● The division of labor, promotions and demotions, compensation system, and operating
budgets are based on the functional competence of the organization and the individuals
within the organization.
● Managers of the functional organizations have the most influence within the plant.
● Each function strives, and is rewarded for, maximizing its own goals; the goals of the orga-
nization as a whole are secondary.

Strengths of the functional organization are as follows:

● There is organizational support for technical competence; members all “speak the same
language.”
● Organization members can specialize in their technical area of competence and let others
be responsible for the big picture.
● Individuals are secure within the walls of their own stable environment.
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.9

THE PLANT ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION 1.9

Weaknesses are as follows:

● Conflict between different functional organizations is unavoidable.
● The vertical hierarchy mandates decision making at the top; decisions are, therefore, slow
in being made.
● Most of the organization members never see the big picture.
● Changing outputs of the organization take a long time to accomplish; bureaucracy is a fre-
quent attribute of a functional organization.

Product Organization. This type organization is a popular one for companies wanting to
move away from the inherent bureaucracy of a functional organization. This structure is well-
suited to a rapidly changing environment. Under this form of organization, plant engineering
personnel are combined into various product teams. Team members do several tasks to max-
imize the quality and quantity of the output of the team. Figure 1.2 shows an example of a
product organization.

FIGURE 1.2 Product organization.

Common characteristics of the product organization are as follows:

● There is a minimal need to coordinate with other teams.
● Promotions and demotions, monetary compensation, and influence depend on the mem-
bers’ ability to work together as a team to produce the desired output.
● Team leaders have the most influence in the organization.

Strengths of the product organization are as follows:

● The organization is responsive to rapidly changing conditions.
● Conflicts with other teams are minimized.
● Team members all can easily see the big picture.
● Team members have an opportunity to develop additional skills and obtain more responsi-
bility.
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.10

1.10 THE PLANT ENGINEER AND THE ORGANIZATION

Weaknesses of this organization are as follows:

● Technical competence of individual team members decreases as individuals attempt to
learn additional skills. Generalists are rewarded; specialists are not.
● It can become difficult to attract technical specialists.
● Innovation is restricted to the specific product or products of the team.
● Teams compete for pooled staff resources.

Matrix Organization. This organization is a combination of the functional and product

organizations. The matrix organization attempts to combine the strengths of the other two
types and eliminate, or at least minimize, the weaknesses of each. To some extent the matrix
organization successfully accomplishes this, but not without some drawbacks of its own.
In a matrix organization, some parts of the plant are organized functionally and others by
product. While plant engineering is typically one of the functional organizations, many mem-
bers are assigned to the product teams. These people usually have dual reporting relation-
ships; they are responsible to the product team leader for their normal day-to-day team
activities, but are also responsible to the plant engineering organization for proper mainte-
nance of their equipment and processes. Figure 1.3 shows a matrix organization.

FIGURE 1.3 Matrix organization.

Strengths of the matrix organization are as follows:

● This type of organization provides maximum flexibility.
● Multiple career paths are provided; both generalists and specialists are rewarded.

Weaknesses are as follows:

● Conflict management is difficult because two bosses must be dealt with.
● Dual compensation systems are necessary to reward both generalists and specialists.
● Few people have the experience and training to work within this type of complex environ-
ment.
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.11

THE PLANT ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION 1.11

THE ROLE OF THE FIRST-LINE SUPERVISOR

As organizations have changed from the traditional functional structure to the product or
matrix structure, the role of the first-line supervisor is changing too. Since this position has the
most impact on attempts to move toward participative management and empowerment of the
workers, an understanding of the supervisor’s role is necessary.
The relationship of the first-line supervisor to the workers in the organization undergoes a
natural transition as the organization develops and workers obtain more and higher skill lev-
els. Some roles to be discussed will occur naturally; others must be formally introduced to
encourage the transition.

Factors Affecting the Supervisor’s Role

The factors that have had a major influence on the changing supervisor’s role are as follows:

● The movement from specialized to generalized jobs

● The merging of line and staff positions with fewer levels of management
● Decision making being pushed to the lowest level possible
● Movement toward group instead of individual accountabilities
● Increased emphasis on team problem solving instead of individual problem solving

A Developmental Model

A developmental model of the first-line supervisor’s changing role is shown in Fig. 1.4 and
described as follows.2

The Leadperson. The leadperson has a dual role of supervisor and worker. Typically, the
individual chosen for the position is the highest qualified from a technical standpoint and
serves as a role model for the group. As the individual workers develop higher skill levels, the
leadperson can assign specific jobs and, if the organization permits, move to the role of a one-
on-one supervisor.

One-on-One Supervisor. This is the traditional role of the first-line supervisor. The supervi-
sor is responsible for directing and controlling a group of workers. He or she is totally respon-
sible for the group’s output, but gets others to do the work. The supervisor’s interpersonal
skills are more important in this role than technical skills.
As workers further develop their skills they require less direct supervision. In addition, the
workers tend to form their own informal subgroups. The supervisor then, often without real-
izing it, becomes a subgroup supervisor.

Subgroup Supervisor. In this role the supervisor manages by communicating with the sub-
group leaders. The worker who does not become a part of a subgroup must still be managed
individually. Some organizations tend to discourage the formation of informal subgroups,
thinking that the authority of the supervisor will be challenged. This attempt to discourage
subgroups usually fails and is a waste of time. More enlightened organizations recognize the
process and attempt to use this role to their benefit.
As the subgroups develop, the supervisor may recognize the groups formally and create
the position of group (or team) leader.

Team Leader. The team leader is responsible for the activities and output of a group of
workers who share the same values, goals, and other common characteristics. The team leader
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.12

1.12 THE PLANT ENGINEER AND THE ORGANIZATION

FIGURE 1.4 First-line supervisor’s changing role.

manages the group by facilitating group interaction, problem solving, and decision making.
Social skills of the team leader are much more important than technical skills. As team mem-
bers develop production, troubleshooting, and problem-solving skills and become more adapt
at leadership, the team leader becomes a team coordinator.

Team Coordinator. A team coordinator shares many leadership functions with other team
members. Individual team members accept specific management-type activities. The team
gradually develops the ability to manage its own responsibilities. When this happens, the
team coordinator is free to become involved in other activities outside the team. As close con-
tact with individual team members becomes less and less frequent, the supervisor assumes the
role of team boundary manager.
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.13

THE PLANT ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION 1.13

Team Boundary Manager. The team boundary manager is removed from daily individual
contact with team members. The manager still maintains responsibility for the team’s activi-
ties and output, however, and must rejoin the team, as necessary, to ensure the quality and
quantity of production. As the need to rejoin the team becomes infrequent, the boundary
manager moves to the final supervisory role of team resource.

Team Resource. A team resource serves as a consultant to several work teams that are held
accountable for their own work. At this point, the teams are truly self-directed, and the first-
line supervisor’s position no longer exists.

DESIGN OF THE PLANT ENGINEERING ORGANIZATION

The changing role of the first-line supervisor has many implications for the design of the plant
engineering organization. No one type of organizational structure is ideal for all situations;
each depends to a large extent on the role of the first-line supervisor or the organization’s
goal for what that role should become. Another primary factor influencing organization
design is the relative maturity of the organization.

Plant Start-Ups

Plant start-ups are best managed by having the first-line supervisor function in the leadperson
role. In these situations, the technical expertise of the workers is low. Supervisors should be
selected, therefore, primarily for their technical abilities. Team training should be provided,
however, to all workers and managers when possible to prepare them for an eventual transi-
tion into a team organization. Some organizations have attempted start-ups with self-directed
work teams, usually with disastrous results. A functional organization works best for start-ups.
As the start-up is completed and workers gain in technical skills, the leadperson becomes
a one-on-one supervisor. Many organizations remain at this stage of development for the
duration of their existence. Since greater participation of workers usually leads to improve-
ments in productivity and quality, however, further organization development is recom-
mended. A one-on-one supervisor works best in a functional organization.
The subgroup supervisor usually functions in this role informally. As mentioned earlier,
some organizations try to eliminate subgroups, usually without much success. Subgroups can
exist in a functional organization and are typically the last stage of development before a for-
mal transition into a team organization.

Transition to a Team Organization

Organizations that want to move from an authoritative to a participative type of management
frequently do so by changing their structure from a functional type to a team organization.
Unfortunately, calling a group a team does not make it so. As discussed, a real team exists
because of the changing role of the first-line supervisor. Calling a supervisor a team leader
accomplishes nothing. Real teams can exist in a functional organization just as well as in a
team organization.

Creating a Real Team Organization

Creating effective work teams requires a high level of commitment by the organization. Both
workers and managers need extensive training in team skills, social skills, technical skills, and
problem-solving skills. In addition, changes in attitudes are required for individuals to effec-
8609_rosaler_1.02_b.qxd 11/13/2001 2:31 PM Page 1.14

1.14 THE PLANT ENGINEER AND THE ORGANIZATION

tively work in the new environment. Finally, management must be prepared to provide
workers with the tools they will need to eventually become true self-directed teams.

Pseudoteams

Plant engineering organizations are affected by the movement to pseudoteams in two ways.
First, the plant engineering organization is affected itself, just like any other organization.
Second, since it is a service organization, plant engineering must function within the parame-
ters set forth by the larger organization of which it is a part.

Plant Engineering in a Matrix Organization

Plant engineering organizations work best as part of a matrix organizational structure. The
weaknesses of a product team organization eventually lead to major issues with effective
maintenance. This is due to two primary factors. First, maintenance must be managed by using
tools not normally a part of the production-oriented manager’s toolbox. Second, a significant
portion of the maintenance effort is more efficiently performed by a core team of specialists.
Examples are major repairs and overhauls, master preventive maintenance scheduling, plan-
ning and estimating of maintenance work, and operation of a computerized maintenance
management system (see Section 2).
As organizations develop and mature, work teams become truly self-directed and supervi-
sors are replaced by team resource persons. The key elements here are develop and mature.
This type of organization is not created by outside influences. It is created from within with
support from the outside.

REFERENCES

1. Raab, A., “Three Ways to Organize,” unpublished manuscript, 1986.

2. Bramlette, C. A., “Free to Change,” Training and Development Journal, March 1984, pp. 32–39.