Live data from Hacker News

Holacracy is Bullshit

cbracy.tumblr.com

91–100 of 110 posts

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#91

The problem with management isn’t managers, the problem with management is bad managers. So, on the one hand, we have what we might call the Lord of the Flies narrative - that Github's pseudo-anarchic non-management just enables people's worst traits to come to the surface; it doesn't remove power imbalances, it just hides them and makes it harder to challenge illegitimate use of that power because it's harder to ide…

If you have different spheres, you are still left with the problem of "bad managers in the management sphere".

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#92
post #83

Eh. I worked at a reasonably holacratic/flat organization (a high-profile agile consultancy, actually), and when I say it was flat, I didn't know who my boss was, or who to give notice to when I quit. It was honestly very flat, and in no sense did this mean "secretly rich white guys ran the show." It did lead to a bit more cliqueyness than might otherwise have been desired. I think that a holacracy, like most things…

I think I work at the "high-profile agile consultancy" you're talking about. I've been there two months and I still have no idea who I talk to about X, where X is a variety of things. Before getting staffed on a project I spent time working on whatever I wanted to learn. At several points I wondered if there was someone I should check in with. It felt so weird to just do what I wanted without having to get permission…

> That said, I don't think I could ever go back to reporting to a manager, especially a non-technical manager.

After working in a flat organization (I'm 99% sure we're talking about the same place here) like we do/did, I agree. It's amazing how much more productive you can be (provided you're a generally high-aptitude, motivated person to begin with) when you are left alone to do what needs to get done. I'd prefer only to work in similar organizational structures from now on. In my experience, even the little cliqueyness you get is hardly an argument against the alternatives (rigid organizational structure, difficult to move vertically, documentation, all the waterfall stuff, and/or the domineering personality of a god-complex startup founder)

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#93

My father, who I consider to have been one of the "real" hippies, told me that he couldn't deal with hippie communes. He claimed that when the group becomes large enough and everyone should be considered equal, a jerk comes in to take advantage of the situation, starts managing, and fucks everything up.

The dynamics of the counterculture communes has been studied, and it is of interest as counterculture was certainly a forefather to modern day Silicon Valley.

See here:

* http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/01/how-silicon-valley-became-the-m...

* http://vimeo.com/73536828 esp. 54:10 and on

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#94
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internalized racism and sexism.

How do you begin to open a discussion on these topics with people who not only lack the necessary education to talk about them accurately, but already have a disdain for words like "feminism" and "privilege"?

You don't. You leave that discussion and have it elsewhere. I don't know about you, but the most feminist response to the alleged Github debacle would be for a woman to go out and start her own company with the culture she wants to see in the world.

There are a lack of women engineers out there, but if the issues we're discussing here are so widespread and destructive, why do we not see more female engineers leaving these misogynistic cultures in droves to start companies together?

Early on in my career I worked at one of the largest banks in the world and sought to promote changes for the better within the bank. After 6 months, I succeeded in getting that behemoth of an organization to move maybe a hundredth of a degree. For all intents and purposes, it was a pyrrhic victory at best. The amount of effort for so little payoff led me to the conclusion that if you want to see the changes you want, then you need to leave that system and head elsewhere, where you can actually have an impact.

Once you've built an organization where you are at the top, you then have the experience to determine how much of what you experienced in prior organizations was actually discrimination and how much was the result of a manager/subordinate relationships. I would genuinely love to hear the opinions of women who have already gone down this route since their voice is conspicuously absent in this discussion.

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#95
post #19

After Jeri Ellsworth was fired from Valve, she had said that the "flat organization" of Valve masked an informal but very real hierarchy that was made up of elites and their cliques. I realize that flat organization is not the same thing as holarchy, but it could be that they both are trading formal hierarchies for informal ones rather than dispensing with them.

Found it[1]. She says, "The one thing I found out the hard way is that there's actually a hidden layer of powerful management structure in the company, and it felt a lot like high school... There's popular kids that have acquired power within the company, then there's the trouble makers and everyone in between."

[1]: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-07-08-valves-flat...

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#96

The problem with management isn’t managers, the problem with management is bad managers. So, on the one hand, we have what we might call the Lord of the Flies narrative - that Github's pseudo-anarchic non-management just enables people's worst traits to come to the surface; it doesn't remove power imbalances, it just hides them and makes it harder to challenge illegitimate use of that power because it's harder to ide…

> In a nutshell, he suggests that we can avoid power imbalances by ensuring that natural and legitimate imbalances within different 'spheres' do not spill over into other ones. In the context of tech companies, we might have, say, a 'discipline' sphere where managers are in charge, a 'technical' sphere where engineers are in charge, a 'design' sphere with designers in charge, and so on. Being the top engineer doesn't…

That's what the CEO is for, and hopefully clear and helpful rules.

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#97
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you begin to open a discussion on these topics with people who not only lack the necessary education to talk about them accurately, but already have a disdain for words like "feminism" and "privilege"?

You don't. You leave that discussion and have it elsewhere. I don't know about you, but the most feminist response to the alleged Github debacle would be for a woman to go out and start her own company with the culture she wants to see in the world. There are a lack of women engineers out there, but if the issues we're discussing here are so widespread and destructive, why do we not see more female engineers leaving…

[deleted]

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#98
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you begin to open a discussion on these topics with people who not only lack the necessary education to talk about them accurately, but already have a disdain for words like "feminism" and "privilege"?

You don't. You leave that discussion and have it elsewhere. I don't know about you, but the most feminist response to the alleged Github debacle would be for a woman to go out and start her own company with the culture she wants to see in the world. There are a lack of women engineers out there, but if the issues we're discussing here are so widespread and destructive, why do we not see more female engineers leaving…

[deleted]

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#99
post #11

Not to change the subject: Having just come out of a totally flat org that was pushing hard for 100% Holacracy I have to say if I didn't leave for other reasons it would have been that. It can be incredibly incredibly difficult to get things done in this environment and sadly made me feel like every day I had to wake up and battle my coworkers because everything was by committee. I'm all for collaboration, but I also…

But that's not what Holacracy pushes for. The organization is supposed to have people with power to decide certain stuff and be accountable for it. It's just not supposed to have a single hierarchy that ends in the CEO and which concentrates all power, but a bunch of "circles" that have role-specific powers. http://holacracy.org/constitution It seems that everyone is blaming the process without following it. Not that…

You got it right. I work with Holacracy and I can confirm... everything you read Holacracy being blamed for, as in Catherine Bracy's article, is actually not against Holacracy.

They think it's against Holacracy, because they mistakenly believe that Holacracy simply means "flat org". Then they build an entire argument around this error...

Since the Zappos story, people talk about "holacracy" here and there. In reality, there are few organizations actually using Holacracy® — the system defined in the constitution you link to. Github isn't part of them, Valve either. Zappos and Medium are.

Re: Holacracy is Bullshit

#100
post #85

I added an edit here, pointing out that GitHub wasn't actually employing holacracy. That was my (pre-breakfast) sloppiness. My main point still stands, though. And Tom Preston-Werner describes his "management" structure here in pretty great detail so we do have some insight into what was actually going on inside GitHub: http://www.oscon.com/oscon2013/public/schedule/detail/29555

Catherine, you are confusing "Holacracy" for a generic term that means "flat organizations" and "lack of structure".

Holacracy® is a specific system with clear rules (available here: http://holacracy.org/constitution ), and is far more structured than what you describe in your article. See for example the structure of my organization running with Holacracy: https://glassfrog.holacracy.org/organizations/5

It's mistake to associate Holacracy to flat organizations — Holacracy is actually FARTHER AWAY from a flat organization than it is from a conventional hierarchy. It pushes very strongly about the looseness and lack of clarity around accountabilities in a structure-less org. It even pushes against the lack of clarity in conventional hierarchies as well. Overall, Holacracy instills more structure in an organization, not less.

Ev Williams, who uses it at Medium, puts it this way:

"Holacracy is the opposite of the cliché way to run a startup. People think "freedom, no job description, everybody does everything, it's totally flat, and that's cool because we're all down with those rules". But actually that creates tons of anxiety and inefficiency, and various modes of dysfunction, whether we have to build consensus around every decision, or I'm gonna do a land grab for power... People romanticize startup cultures, but I know it's fairly rare that people in startups say "this is it, it is amazing and everybody is super-productive and going along". So in Holacracy, one of the principles is to make the implicit explicit — tons of it is about creating clarity: who is in charge of what, who is taking what kind of decision — and there is also a system for defining that, and changing that, so it's very flexible at the same time." (source: https://medium.com/p/89fb713a8786 )

So... I'm afraid your assessment of Holacracy is really backward. I'm not saying Holacracy is perfect, but it's certainly not flawed in the ways you describe.

@oliviercp

Post reply on HN