The Tyranny of Structurelessness (1972)

Re:The Tyranny of Structurelessness (1972) by Flenser on Monday May 09, 2016 @11:18AM (#11660447)

Perhaps I misunderstood Holocracy when I looked into it but I thought it was about being able to modify the structure of the organisation in real-time, so it had just the right amount of structure.

http://wiki.holacracy.org/index.php?title=FAQ says > Is there no hierarchy in Holacracy? Yes and no. There is no management hierarchy as we’re used to it, and no hierarchy of people/managers. However it’s not a structureless" structure either. Holacracy uses a totally different type of hierarchy: a holarchy of roles, and not a hierarchy of people/managers.

I guess being given tasks from more than one Holacracy role can lead to not knowing which to prioritise? Is that a fair representation of what you said?

Is this something you've witnessed first hand or heard about or is it just a hypothetical?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Tyranny of Structurelessness (1972) by nomade0 on Monday May 09, 2016 @10:02PM (#11664726)

You're right Flenser. In fact there is typically more structure in a company running with Holacracy vs. a traditional management hierarchy. Or maybe more accurately, the structure is clearer and more explicit with Holacracy at play.

I wrote a post about this: "Holacracy vs. Hierarchy vs. Flat Orgs" https://blog.holacracy.org/holacracy-vs-hierarchy-vs-flat-or...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Tyranny of Structurelessness (1972) by Flenser on Tuesday May 10, 2016 @08:31AM (#11666712)

Thanks Olivier, interesting read. I particularly liked the second chart. I hadn't appreciated that holacracy had less hierarchy of people than flat orgs.

[ Parent | on HN ]