Live data from Hacker News

No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

doist.com

321–325 of 325 posts

Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

#321
post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One method I've found to work well, especially with engineers: Make it clear to the team that the new leader is stepping up temporarily to fill a significant business need. That the engineer is doing the team a favor by doing this and that the plan is for it to be temporary because that engineer is a great IC. It then becomes very easy for the new leader to go back to being an IC. They can even be thanked for steppin…

That last bit makes the rest look like a rather transparent attempt to mask a trial period.

Polite fictions make the world go round!

Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

#322
post #37

Earlier 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…

I think you’re making this more complex then it needs to be. There will always be sociopaths.

Like you?

It sounds like you got hurt in a flat structure and were thinking on that here. I feel sorry for you that happened to you.

Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

#323
post #37

Earlier 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…

Who ordered the word salad?

You're the only one at the table, Sir. This delightful serving comes gratis with your side of bitter sous-word-chef greens. Shall I get you a second helping from the kitchen, Sir?

Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general we hire folks who've already been peak career (think like MS premier field engineers for 15+ years), give them an amorphous organization to work with, and treat them like adults. People lift each other up and successes are celebrated. It's not really a place where folks want to be "senior executive vice president" type title BS. Comp is based on a cut of revenue which encourages teamwork like nothing else…

I am wholly convinced that the reason terrible young shitbags (like myself) can join the army and end up doing very well is because the army does what seemingly no one else does, which is treating them like adults by giving them pretty huge responsibilities and holding them accountable.

It would probably not surprise you the number of vets we have working for us (or that "extreme ownership" is on the required reading list when you join)

Re: No Kings: How Do You Make Good Decisions Efficiently in a Flat Organization?

#325
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't you have both? You have the right to a direct vote, but you also have the option to bestow your vote to a representative to cast for you. Seems like a neat idea and solves many of these structureless problems. Many people know that a topic is out of their reach or interest, but they may know someone knowledgable to give their vote to to cast for them. If they feel that person doesn't represent them, they can…

What you're describing is proxy voting. It works well in certain circumstances: primarily in shareholding, where there are well-understood ways to divvy up authority. But most proxies are given with general power. This makes them comparable but not identical to a representative system. The problem with proxies for politics is twofold. First, there is the business of carving out subjects. If I hand John the power to v…

This is a nice response, thanks. The one miscalculation here is it's clear that representational democracy is also rife with demagoguery. Because the system is 'slower', it gives those in power the ability to cause damage to the system, but keep their office because they support other populist sentiments. Often the issues that are most important are the ones that get abused, while the popular-but-less-important issues are the ones that people vote on for their representative. Without the representative, then these less popular topics can be voted on justly/rightly by people that need these bills (minority issues in particular). I agree though that the speed of direct democracy can also be problematic in a similar way: too hasty decisions on the popular topics.
Post reply on HN