Sounds like US immigration policy.
No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
81–90 of 113 posts
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#82I would like to speak with someone in charge around here?
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. I've noticed that organizations that often times claim to be 'leaderless', just have other implicit ways of exerting power and influence. Truly leaderless is difficult, and requires humility from all it's members.
Yep. It only works as long as everyone knows each other. I've been arguing this point for years with my anarchist friends (both left and right varieties), who seem unwilling to grapple with basic concepts like scale and externalities. I don't think straight hierarchies are the only possible organizational structure but it does seem like more people want to be told what to do than to think for themselves. .
My experience working with anarchist friends is that something as simple as leadership creates a certain hierarchy. Obviously if there's nothing formal everyone is pretty cool, but in the organisation of a society and a longer time frame I can see how it can lead to our historical material conditions.
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#84You know that ship that has no captain ?
Yeah me neither.
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#85[deleted]
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#86It's worth keeping in mind that this is a company of 40 people. Half the size of most primitive hunter-gatherer tribes which had no formal organization whatsoever. At sizes that small, everyone knows each other, everyone knows what everyone else is doing, and people can make decisions through consensus after a round of informal discussions. The problems only start once the "tribe" grows beyond 150. That's when the nu…
Still. There are 40 people companies where some people don't have the slightest idea what others are doing (anecdata: I am working for such a company at the moment).
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#87I don't believe this works well, especially in larger organisations. Groups of people naturally form a hierarchy, whether it's officially recognised or not. It's human nature.
Bullshit. It's trained into people. Starts from your first day of school.
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#88This BBC article is terrible and manipulates the reader via the omission of critical facts. If you haven't read it yet, I suggest you first read the company's recruitment webpage[1] and specifically their following sentence: - "It also means that there is no guaranteed salary. The only thing we guarantee is that you will have to pay a flat fee every month plus one-tenth of what you bill." After making a mental note o…
In a typical company, earning a fixed monthly salary, you will end up paying the company the majority of the money you make for them, and the more value you produce the company, the less you earn by comparison (since in most companies your contribution is not immediately reflected in the salary and can be hard to measure).
Flat fee + 10% of earnings seems very, very generous to me by comparison.
But I do agree that was a very important detail left out of the article!
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've asked you repeatedly to stop posting unsubstantive comments to HN. We ban accounts that use HN this way, so please stop.
It's my right to write whatever I want and it's also your right to ban me
It isn't your right to post whatever you want to this site, and I don't want to ban you. I'd much prefer to convince you to use HN as intended.
There's a constant downward pressure on the quality of this site—that's how things go on the internet—so we all have to make the effort of posting civilly and substantively, or else HN will get worse and we'll lose the things that make it worth visiting.
Re: No CEO: A Swedish company where nobody is in charge
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. It only works as long as everyone knows each other. I've been arguing this point for years with my anarchist friends (both left and right varieties), who seem unwilling to grapple with basic concepts like scale and externalities. I don't think straight hierarchies are the only possible organizational structure but it does seem like more people want to be told what to do than to think for themselves. .
My experience working with anarchist friends is that something as simple as leadership creates a certain hierarchy. Obviously if there's nothing formal everyone is pretty cool, but in the organisation of a society and a longer time frame I can see how it can lead to our historical material conditions.
If you're interested, I've been toying with the idea of an organizational structure that's loosely but explicitly modeled on the human body. My basic idea is that since bodies are complex interdependent structures that mostly Just Work, social structures that explicitly recapitulate human anatomy should be inherently more robust.