There is no longer any chance to debate whether or not multi-bossing is a good thing. Now that only one PA in seven works for a single boss, and three-fifths of secretaries work for three or more, you might just as well accept that you are unlikely to get back to the classic days of one-to-one working.

Now, it is true that there are organisations in which multi-bossing works well. It is also true that there are organisations in which it is a disaster. It is true that it works in some companies which are successful, and it is true that it operates in some organisations which are going downhill. The trick is to find out which you're in, and make work it for you accordingly.

But why did multi-bossing happen in the first place? Before economics led to the so-called "downsizing" in many corporates, the line of command was easy — you reported to the one above you, who did the same. When economics forced wholesale cuts in middle-management, and then in the ground-level staff as well, those of executive level who remained found there were more chiefs left than indians.

If you're currently multi-bossing, you're not alone. It has happened to many middle-level staff — many marketing and sales managers must now report both directly upwards, and at the same time "outwards" to geographic regions or other functions. There are people at senior-director level who have exactly the same problem.

Blame the Matrix!
There have been attempts to justify all this by high-sounding names — the "matrix management" theory suggests that multi-bossing was designed to "foster teamwork among employees of different specialties and to create more innovative services by widening the field of input". Yes, you can believe that if you like.

In fact, it happened because corporate downsizing was so unscientific that the proportions of some organisations were ruined. It has also happened quite deliberately in some companies which are performing badly — if a company isn't progressing, managers aren't getting the opportunity for promotion, so they are given extra duties in the hope that they will stay challenged and remain with the organisation. Heaven help the PA.

Multi-bossing, or 'matrix management', offers opportunities and problems. Looking at it positively and encouragingly, there is nothing like it for putting the PA in a strategically powerful position — the one person in a matrix-management system who can become the central contact for many managers and functions. However, the adverse side is the one which most people have to put up with. A survey from the Gordon Yates agency found that for 54 per cent of secretaries, their biggest problem at work is juggling the priorities of working for several bosses.

Somebody once described this situation: "Imagine an 800-pound gorilla tied to each of your wrists, pulling in opposite directions." He wasn't a PA — he was a senior director responsible for 600 staff, but he also had to report to both a chairman and a president. He suggests starting with what he calls a "fact-finding mission" — that is, sitting down with each of the bosses seperately, and simply saying you want to gain a better understanding of what's expected of you, between the two of them. This is non-confrontational — it means that later, if they send you in different directions, you won't need to throw a tantrum, because responsibility for what you do has already been agreed.

PAs with split personalities required
Joan Lloyd, the American workplace guru who has employment columns in fifteen Stateside newspapers, observes that "working for more than one boss can make anyone schizophrenic, yet many administrative assistants must split their personalities to work for multiple bosses".

She believes that resolving this is not the PA's problem.

"There is no reason why you should be forced to call meetings in order to corner your bosses into a joint decision or approach. Clearly, you are doing your job — they should be meeting and deciding what your priorities are, and how to approach an assignment before they ask you to tackle it."

Although many gurus advocate the idea of a meeting between all parties to lay down ground rules and priorities, this can be an extremely daunting prospect for the PA. Summoning one's bosses to a meeting and laying down the law can take a little courage, but those who have done it say that, handled well, it really does help in team-building.

If you do convene such a meeting, says one consultant, never even suggest that multi-bossing is making your life difficult, because it won't get the right result. By contrast, the approach of "how is this going to help my bosses achieve their goals?" is likely to get a better reaction.

You can start individually, say the gurus. Go to one executive and ask for advice on how you can help him work smarter, and explain that you can save his time by not bothering him when you know what his aim is. Then ask the other one the same question.

If there are clear indications of likely clashes in priority, you can then politely request an informal coffee-table chat to sort them out — and, because you have been so transparently open and professional with both, you don't lose any face or appear to be seen as anything other than helpful.

Sadly, the most familiar problem arises when one boss aims to win priority over another. This brings in both operational and ethical problems — not only is balancing them a trick in itself, the PA cannot allow her problems in doing so to be seen by her staff or juniors, because it brings her own control into question. Worse still is if two managers dislike each other, and worse again if they show it — because the PA certainly cannot acknowledge this. "Moral authority is a managerial imperative," say the experts, and to show dislike is to lose this moral standpoint — the trick for the PA is not to lose hers.

How to cope with multi-bossing
Kerry Gleeson, the Florida-based time-management guru, says that practical organisation will get you round some of this. He maintains that most multi-bossed multi-taskers are simply not organising to cope with the multi-boss capacity — their desktop is still organised for one boss only.

Gleeson recommends: "You need to keep a permanent logbook open on your desk. Write into it everything that you think of doing or are asked to do. Write each job in big letters, and separate tasks by drawing a thick line between them. How does this keep work on track? Let's say you're in the middle of typing a letter for one boss and another boss comes by and says, 'Can you please check on my flight details?'."

"You nod your head and write that job in big letters in your log book. But you complete the letter you are working on before moving to that other job. This step is critical. You must finish the job you are working on, and I mean complete it, before you go back to your log book and move to one of the jobs that came in while you were wrapping up that project."

It is, he suggests, very unusual to find a multi-bossed PA who has organised her computer to allow for multi-bossing. Onscreen directories for each boss, subdirectories for their different categories of documents, and separate email files are comparatively rare. But this is a very good place to start!