Convenient for owners to choose the best

Helps shorten project cycle

Conducive to controlling project quality

Conducive to prospering the construction market

Large number of contracts and heavy coordination workload

Investment control is difficult

Less coordination workload for owners

Small number of contracts and simple contract management

The contractor is at high risk

Clear responsibilities and simple contractual relationships

Easy to coordinate and control, conducive to cost control

Design and construction can be arranged as a whole by the unit

Conducive to progress and investment control

Bidding and contracting are difficult and can easily lead to contract disputes

Owners have a narrow range of choices

Difficult to control quality

Owner initiative is limited

The contractor has high risks and the contract price is high

Strong general purpose

Clear distribution of rights, responsibilities and benefits among the three parties

Facilitates contract management, risk management and investment reduction

Long project cycle

Owner management fees are higher

Large initial investment

Conducive to contract management, coordination and control

Take big risks

Strong economic strength

Complete professional range

High professional level

High probability of winning the bid and low construction risk and liability

The total price is too high

Differences in opinions

Reduce the burden on government management projects

Expand local funding sources

Can gain huge profits and expand business activity space

Reduce market competition pressure

Government: Taking greater risks and making it harder to determine the rate of return

Project Company: Risks of market changes, investment returns are uncertain

Project-focused with clear goals

Centralized power, consistent orders, and quick decision-making

Simple, flexible and easy to operate

Conducive to the growth of comprehensive management talents

Organizations are duplicated and resources are idle

It is difficult to provide opportunities for mutual communication and learning, which is not conducive to the improvement of the company's technical level.

It is not conducive to the overall coordination of corporate leaders

Not conducive to communication between the project and the outside world

Lack of work continuity and security, exacerbating enterprise instability

Having a dedicated project manager responsible for managing the entire project can overcome the passive situation of unclear functional organization, no one taking responsibility for the project, and difficulty in coordination.

Reduce resource clutter that occurs in project-based organizations

Project team members are less worried about the end of the project. When the designated project is no longer needed, project personnel have their own functional destinations and most of them return to their original functional departments.

Have greater mobility and adaptability

By balancing the power of functional managers and project managers, business leaders can make overall arrangements for resources to ensure the achievement of the overall system goals.

The balance of power can easily aggravate tensions between project managers and functional managers, and even cause antagonism among managers.

Each project manager cares more about the success of his or her own project than the goals of the entire company

It is difficult for the project manager to clearly distinguish the responsibilities and rights of the project and functional departments during the execution process

Project members receive dual leadership

Project managers need to spend a lot of time coordinating between various functional departments, which affects the speed and efficiency of decision-making, especially in a balanced matrix.