I have been working in several different organizations over the last few years and came across holacracy as an antidote to hierarchical structures of management that often lead to lack of taking ownership, stifling of innovative ideas and organizational evolution, and disenfranchisement of participants. It is neither top down, nor bottoms up, but rather much flatter and transparent. It is a distributed process management system that includes mechanisms for continuous improvements.
I just spent the last three weeks at Wheaton Labs and saw that much progress could potentially be gained by adopting a holocratic methodology. It would, however, be a shift away from the benign dictator model being employed under Paulus Maximus' wise leadership. But it would answer a lot of the tensions they expressed (a tension being the difference between the current state of something and the desired state of that same thing) as well as take some decision making off of Paul's broad shoulders. Paul would still retain veto authority, but everyone else would be given the tools to accomplish many goals without the bottleneck in decision processing and empower them to do so, as well as, causing people to care about taking ownership of their own areas of operation. The process still retains checks and balances, without getting bogged down into consensus decision making.
Have you heard of holacracy? What do you think of it? How does it compare with other systems? What are your favorite methods?
jump at the sun,
snakes are really good at eating slugs. And you wouldn't think it, but so are tiny ads:
100th Issue of Permaculture Magazine - now FREE for a while