Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's basically what tech has been doing for a while. Or at least a derivation of it. Agile, self-managed team, "retrospectives", "scrums". At least that's how it was sold to my employer when they had the same change not long ago. "This is what Google does and they are innovative. Don't you want to be innovative like Google?" Checks all the boxes a CEO wants to hear.
This is not at all what Google does, though.
Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
151–160 of 497 posts
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#152However, this is worth a try. HR can devote itself to slapping down anyone who tries to become the toughest convict in the yard. Or the meanest girl in the cheerleading squad.
Middle managers are invariably the source of all corporate problems. So postulating "we're not going to have any" is a good start, but then you have to control the problems that inevitably arise from that.
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#153The reality is that Bayer is in deep mud with their lawsuit and laying off lots of people in Germany is difficulty. If you pack it under a nice « we are modern, amazing shift » package, then he will get more support and also shareholders will be pleased (for a while). That’s my theory.
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#154> Stewart Butterfield, former CEO of Slack, recently described a dynamic within tech companies behind much of the over-hiring. He noted on Bloomberg’s Odd Lots podcast in late May that when there’s no real constraint on hiring, “you hire someone, and the first thing that person wants to do is hire other people.” The reason is that “the more people who report to you, the higher your prestige, the more your power in th…
“I built a massively complex system to manage our cloud deployment” looks superficially more impressive than “I eliminated the need for a complex deployment by rearchitecting a bit and consolidating systems, so then I only had to manage a few things.”
The first person will have more code they can cite and more expertise wrangling more systems. They’ll be able to talk about all the big sexy “hyperscale” stuff they have managed with lots of terabytes and Kubernetes and terraform and helm charts. Most people would probably hire this person.
I’d hire the second person.
It’s basically the midwit meme, which is so popular because it illustrates something real.
There seems to be a core conflict in society between systems as things we build to do things vs systems as ends in themselves. Morons just do things. Geniuses just do things. Midwits get mixed up into the process of doing things and forget the point.
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#155Self-organizing still leads to bosses, but they just get paid like regular workers. My company does this sort of thing but with dev chapter leads. The chapter leads have no management training and no authority. They don't even really know what you're doing since they're on a separate team and have their own coding work. They're senior devs that have added management responsibilities and are just paid as senior devs.…
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
So… the goal is for you to do nothing? Except not impede people making decisions and hiring consultants when you, not the person closer to the issue, thinks it’s not working?
As someone squarely in this position for the last few years (from a prior senior engineering position), I would say my job is to try to emulate the decisions and guidance my manager would give, but to more people than he has time to do it for. This is fairly obvious because for a while he was doing that for too many people because we couldn't find a person for the position. If I can speed up answers and feedback and…
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi, sometime middle-manager here. The goal isn't to have me make decisions, its to let people around me make decisions quickly and well enough that most of the time it works out, and when it doesn't, we can roll back easily. If this isn't working out, I hire experts to improve the quality of decision-making, with me making decisions as a last resort.
So… the goal is for you to do nothing? Except not impede people making decisions and hiring consultants when you, not the person closer to the issue, thinks it’s not working?
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#158Holocracy has never worked. Someone has to do the management tasks, even if you pretend there aren’t any managers.
I'm here at Bayer right now and that is pretty much what is happening. The RIFs are finishing up and my team leader is now my peer. Our boss now has 10x the reports. Even a 30 minute 1:1 with everyone would take his entire week. And some people just need (or want ) to be told what to do. You can't have everyone be a Steve Jobs and dream up things with nothing concrete getting done. I believe this is just a smokescree…
Lawsuits were bound to happen. Monsanto has been highprofile for ages, and not in a good way.
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#159I am convinced that hierarchical structures and strong leadership are necessary, but some layers are often superfluous.
Re: Bayer is getting rid of bosses and asking staff to ‘self-organize’
#160Apply this logic recursively, if there is enough cash, and you can easily imagine where it goes.
And it is also extremely difficult to unwind, they usually are pretty smart and cunning individuals who know how to make it look like all of this is necessary.