Your browser doesn't support the features required by impress.js, so you are presented with a simplified version of this presentation.

For the best experience please use the latest Chrome, Safari or Firefox browser.

One structure – Many cultures

Napok óta gyűjtöm mi zavaros nekem a Holacracy - Teal témában. Van pár megértésem, és sok kérdésem amivel remélem hasznos lesz együtt foglalkoznunk.

LowerRight quadrant

When does H help?
When does a heavy systems quadrant become a burden?

Good man don’t need rules

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5JnqPSzSLo

Whenever a problem comes up, someone, somewhere, will call for tried-and-proven solutions: let’s add a rule, a control system; let’s put the issue under some centralized function; let’s add a layer of supervision; let’s make processes more prescriptive; let’s make such decisions at a higher level in the future. (RO)

Let’s take a practical example: the tendency in organizations to create rules and policies. Avoiding rules and policies is no easy feat. We have grown up with a deeply held assumption that control mechanisms make us safe. No matter how many corporate scandals keep happening in organizations full of control mechanisms, we hold on to this assumption. Whenever something goes wrong, whenever a colleague makes a stupid decision or abuses the system, there will be loud cries to put control systems in place to prevent the problem from happening again. And for that reason, over time, most large organizations end up with expense policies, travel guidelines, dress codes, company car policies, client entertainment policies, supplier agreement procedures, vacation policies, mobile phone and IT policies, email and Internet usage policies … and the list goes on and on. Of course, a policy is useful only if it is enforced, so some department is given authority to impose some paper trail for compliance and to hand down punishment in case of infringement. (RO)

Every tension is turned into: Role/Accountability or Policy changes

Pénteki gyakorlat: A Tension javaslat gyakran hogy hozzunk létre egy új policy-t.

Policy: No obscene drawings on the wall of the women’s bathroom?

Role - Person coupling

High (almost 1:1) at Zappos, Prezi, FAVI
Low (multiple roles are common) at Holacracy One, Buurzorg,

How about DS?

Power Hierarchy?

Chain of fear and dependence or trust and co-dependence?

Scarcity vs. abundance mindset

  • in both directions
  • inside and outside of the org

Role-filler ≈ “Employee”

  • Do I have enough other roles to fill that I’m not dependent on you as a LeadLink? (≈ market demand for me)

  • How much time do I have to search for a new role? (≈ financial independence)

Do I have enough potential people to fill the roles in my circle that I’m not dependent on you as a role fillter? (≈ skill shortage)

Dismissal

RO.Orange:
“Boss has authority (with HR approval) to dismiss a subordinate”

RO.Teal:
“Dismissal last step in mediated conflict resolution mechanism”
“Until we are proven wrong, trusting co-workers is our default means of engagement.”

Zappos Green People-People circle

Video ( http://money.cnn.com/video/news/2014/02/17/n-zappos-holacracy-no-job-titles.cnnmoney/ )

They are also responsible for dismissals
(todo Where did I read this?)

BlackBird / OrangeGreen
[…] performance circle that is tasked explicitly with ensuring compliance of our code of conduct, our guidebook, and our cultural goals. Each lead link — the manager specific to one’s role in a circle — feeds up to the performance circle and provides a view of how each contributor, lead link, and executive fits with his or her own individual accountabilities and goals, as well as the company’s expectations of acceptable behaviors

Orange example https://medium.com/@LaineVCampbell/hr-and-holacracy-44180db648f
Holacracy is also not managerless. At Blackbird, we had no interest in creating such a structure. We wanted Holacracy because it provides a structure for self-governance that can help a distributed organization scale while continuing to support its employees well. We used the structures in Holacracy to create a performance circle that is tasked explicitly with ensuring compliance of our code of conduct, our guidebook, and our cultural goals. Each lead link — the manager specific to one’s role in a circle — feeds up to the performance circle and provides a view of how each contributor, lead link, and executive fits with his or her own individual accountabilities and goals, as well as the company’s expectations of acceptable behaviors.

“Like a founder”

Is appointed. (By whom?)
How much does he depend on the RepLink of the SuperCircle?

Is still really powerful

Includes:

  • responsible for the circle’s performance
  • priorities, resource allocation
  • creating, filling Roles
  • removing Partners from Roles
  • holds the circle boundaries
  • define / assign metrics

No Red

  • Mico-management

No Blue

  • procedures to follow

No Orange

  • ??

No Green

  • taking care of conflicts
  • decide what tensions gets processed
  • protect people from the top

Teal Buurtzorg team coaches are not responsible

“Employee champion”

Counter-balance the LeadLink’s power?
Complete the feedback loop.

time-span of decision-making

Higher up in the Holarcy longer time spans?

Teal checks and balances

workers can choose at any moment to join another team

At FAVI, a simple but powerful relief valve exists, should a team leader find the taste of power too sweet: workers can choose at any moment to join another team. Team leaders have no meaningful way of coercing people into desired behavior; they certainly don’t have the authority to fire people unilaterally. If they start to behave autocratically, people can simply walk away. (RO)

Talking about assumptions => Culture

Only by shining light on these fear-based beliefs can we decide to choose a different set of assumptions. FAVI, AES, and others have found that when colleagues know and talk about the two sets of assumptions frequently, people shift their belief system. The risk that fear-based control mechanisms will creep in through the back door is minimized. Someone will speak up and say, “Wait a minute! Does this new process fit our assumptions? I think not.” (RO)

Roles own Domains

  • Power is a limited supply – we need to distribute it.
  • Everybody is fully powerful to take any decision that matters to them:
    • a, on a domain agreed upfront
    • b, if they take the perspective of other people in that domain into account

H domains are autocratic. There is no integrative decision process for realizing (b)

H. Deals with the territorial nature by giving everyone a territory.

Power in other structures

Wholeness

Free market of roles and people

[As a LeadLink] I’ll want somebody that can come in and be a hero with that role and absolutely not beyond that role. […] Usually somebody is too much of a hero outside of their role or not enough hero in their role – Brian

Let the people pitch for roles they want to energize.