It's not necessarily about finding what roles need to be filled in the whole organization. It's more about doing what needs to be done in your department. If something needs to be done in another department, you point out the problem and they decide how to fix it.
> or that a role that is filled needs to be filled by someone else as the person currently doing it is suboptimal and doesn't realize it
I think Holacracy is actually better at solving this problem than traditional management. If a role isn't being fulfilled well, it's everyone's job to bring that up at a department meeting so the group can decide how to fix the problem.
> It all makes perfect sense and a small organization, but how could it ever work at the scale of something like Zappos?
I have no idea. I hope they make it work. It sounds better than the status quo.
Isn't that true of any idea? That's just describing how someone would belittle an idea while not focusing on the content.
It all makes perfect sense and a small organization, but how could it ever work at the scale of something like Zappos? At that size how can any employee have enough information to make a good decision as to what role in the organization needs filling right now? For that a role that is filled needs to be filled by someone else as the person currently doing it is suboptimal and doesn't realize it.
It seems like one of those things where the communication demands necessary to keep it running smoothly between all the individuals would quickly overwhelm what any normal person could actually do. The obvious solution is to have people in charge of relaying messages to other sets of people. Whoops. I added hierarchy.