Find out who can approve an invoice for payment. He's the boss.
It takes really little effort to use "they" instead of "he" to include all people.
They the boss.
No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
111–120 of 325 posts
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with your point but in the end the article was more about efficient decision making in engineering teams and less about flat organizations. Up-voted both the article and your comment :) Reminds me about the stuff I've read about Valve. In theory, and maybe if you have strong healthy de facto leadership it could work. In practice it seems more like an excuse to dodge responsibility, leading to pretty toxic pla…
This is a common criticism of Valve's model, and it's fair to say that Valve's model isn't clearly obviously better, but those attack's on Valve don't make the case that the traditional hierarchical model, with its own well-known problems, is better.
Do you have a good link about Valve’s model and are they a socialist / EMPLOYEE OWNED organization?
Update: I read about it and no, they are basically anarcho syndicalist and overall owned by a enligtened/benevolent set of owners.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#113I would like to refer to the following - The Tyranny of Structurelessness, originally meant to address the concerns regarding 'flat' organizations. "This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a sm…
[deleted]
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#114I would like to refer to the following - The Tyranny of Structurelessness, originally meant to address the concerns regarding 'flat' organizations. "This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a sm…
A few years ago I joined a company with "self-organizing" teams, which have many similarities to "structureless". It was an awful experience, for me at least. Many important choices were made by people trying to avoid ruffling the feathers of the least-mature team member. My woes were likely compounded by being mildly affected by Asperger syndrome: First, I have an innate preference for clear organization and structu…
I have the same experience in a "matrix management" organization. It seems like the managers figured out how to delegate the act of management to their reports.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#115The comments here have completely derailed. Remove "flat organization" from the post title, and the article is still valid. It's talking about consensus making which applies to any org structure.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#116I would like to refer to the following - The Tyranny of Structurelessness, originally meant to address the concerns regarding 'flat' organizations. "This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a sm…
Most flat org I've seen are not flat. The people naturally organised in tribes that are only known by themself, and that are in no organigram. Each tribe have an implicit leader that bears no title yet influences all decisions just by regular social interractions. Tribes communicate, negociate even, through the implicit leaders even if not directly. Some kind of overuling bdfl also oversees all tribes, like a king, i…
He refers himself as “the leader of Doist’s back-end team” so there is indeed some sort of structure.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are shadow power structures, but I don't think you are correct that they are necessarily hierarchical.
Isn't hierarchy intrinsic to power?
I think it is a more practical relationship than something intrinsic. Power (or relative power, really) comes from consolidation and control of resources or agency. Hierarchy is a very efficient and scalable topology for command and control, helpful to manage such a consolidation.
But, other methods might be possible to wield power without hierarchy. An individual with massive wealth can consolidate financial power. They certainly depend on a system that enforces rules and protects financial interests, but can you really call that hierarchy? They might perform significant, world-changing transactions but they do not continue to control the assets once they are traded. It might be a hierarchical distribution in the "trickle-down" sense, but is not hierarchical control nor planning.
Or, if someone obtains some sort of scifi doomsday weapon and uses it to extort others, is that expressing hierarchy?
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#118I would like to refer to the following - The Tyranny of Structurelessness, originally meant to address the concerns regarding 'flat' organizations. "This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a sm…
I disagree. I oppose concentrations of power. Will there be a certain power disparity and hegemony of certain particiants in their little groups? Sure, but as long as they are prevented or discouraged by various mechanisms from joining together into still larger groups, then everyone still has a fighting chance of opposing them or switching groups. The trouble arises when you have concentrations of power. Just look a…
I think it is worth reading the whole essay (The Tyranny of Structurelessness), which does a great job of articulating how if there are no formal levers of power it becomes very difficult for people who don't have power to make changes within the organization.
For example, if I'm part of a club and I think the treasurer is doing a bad job, if there are 'formal' elections I can run for treasurer (or vote for a different treasurer) and make changes.
In a structureless org it is much harder to tell the 'popular people' that, for example, some of the expenses they are having the club reimburse should actually be paid out of pocket (because by definition the 'popular people' have a lot of informal influence - average or unpopular people are much easier to correct).
If one person is highly charismatic they could wield huge amounts of power in a structureless organization - but in a structured organization there can be clear limits on what each role can do. Structures can constrain power and make it easier for those with less informal power to make changes or to create those limits.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#119Assuming whatever you're trying to do is a good idea, my method is to just write a "heads-up"-type message and just go for it. For example, "I'm going to do foo. If anyone has any concerns or anything, please let me know". This covers your ass, provides a discussion/feedback area, and lets you actually get things done without a lengthy bike-shedding process. One important lesson I have learned in my career is that fo…
Oh man. This is one of those things that's great when done well and terrible when done poorly. Miss the head-up memo until the following day? Too late, the author's already a day into the work and you'd be a jerk to make them back all that out. If it happens often, you have to constantly monitor communication channels or risk missing an important "heads-up," since that's how serious decisions are being made now. In the middle of your own work, but see a 10-page design doc go by in slack or email? Better drop everything and read it well enough to form an opinion because every minute that goes by it becomes harder to object to that change.
But, as you say, it can be a great way to overcome bikeshedding. It's a good way to speed up a ponderous decision-making culture. It works.
Like a lot of organizational tricks, the line between use and abuse is something that simply requires judgement.
Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not just the women's movement, any postmodern "leaderphobic" group of anti-heroes will operate under this adhocratic masking of power. It's still power, but it's the power-pill that palatable to their sensibilities, suitably masked. Marxist revolutions "of the peasants" pioneered this mass delusion of flattening. But isn't this just gaslighting people? I mean "flat" is just disempowering existing power structure…
"Marxist revolutions 'of the peasants' pioneered this mass delusion of flattening." Ironically the Bolshevik revolution didn't really start out this way. The Bolsheviks advocated for a strict disciplined party model - if you've ever read what Lenin wrote of the Left-communists and Anarchists, it was clear that he was very much not mindlessly "against" structure. Of course, this would all eventually be liquidated by S…
On the topic of Lenin, one can read The state and revolution where he defends the need of a strong state in a communist regime, and this quote: "the people don't want freedom, they want power. Freedom ? What would they do with it ?!"