Medium gives up on holacracy
No, Ev Williams isn't going anywhere. But the radical management philosophy the company has been using for the past several years—holacracy—has left the building. In a post released today, Medium announced it will no longer use the "self-management" system trumpeted by the likes of Zappos and other companies as the antidote to traditional hierarchy. An "operating system" invented by software developer Brian Robertson, holacracy is organized into "Circles," rather than teams or units, and replaces bosses with "Lead Links." Sounds intriguing, yes? So we’re off Holacracy. ...the system had begun to exert a small but persistent tax on our both effectiveness and our sense of connection to each other. It's an interesting statement. Holacracy empowers some people, particularly those who weren't in positions of power before. It may simply be, to borrow a phrase, that old-fashioned hierarchy is the worst approach—except for every other one that has been tried.
It’s Time to Become Future Fit Today | The Nature of Business
In times of turmoil, the danger lies not in the turmoil but in facing it with yesterday’s logic Increasing volatility, complexity and uncertainty is the new norm, hence our organizations need to be able to not just survive but thrive amidst unceasing transformation.Too many of today’s organizations are locked in to hierarchic, KPI-obsessed, siloed, control-based, defensive, reactionary and fire-fighting mind-sets strangling the ability to adapt and evolve amid volatility.Isolated initiatives such as wellbeing-at-work, purposeful business, mindfulness, and corporate social responsibility, often leave the underlying logic, culture and ethos of the organization unchecked.Only a fundamental overhaul of the underlying logic will enable our firms of the future to flourish amid these transformational times. As well as all this, there are complex shifts affecting each of us at deep and partly unconscious levels, challenging how we perceive ourselves, each other and the world around us. Like this:
L’Urssaf considère que les chauffeurs d’Uber sont des salariés
Bienvenue ! {* welcomeName *} {* loginWidget *} Bienvenue ! {* #signInForm *} {* signInEmailAddress *} {* currentPassword *} {* /signInForm *} Votre compte a été désactivé Vous devez vérifier votre adresse email pour finaliser votre inscription. {* #resendVerificationForm *} {* signInEmailAddress *}{* /resendVerificationForm *} Merci de confirmer les informations ci-dessous avant de vous connecter {* #socialRegistrationForm *} {* firstName *} {* lastName *} {* emailAddress *} {* displayName *} {* phone *} {* addressCity *} {* addressCountry *} En cliquant sur "Créer un compte", vous confirmez que vous acceptez nos conditions générales et que vous avez lu et approuvé la politique de protection de données personnelles.{* /socialRegistrationForm *} Merci de confirmer les informations ci-dessous avant de vous connecter Nous vous avons envoyé un email de confirmation à l'adresse suivante {* emailAddressData *}. Nous vous enverrons un lien pour créer un nouveau mot de passe {| moreInfoText |}
3 Reasons Holacracy Didn't Work for Medium: A Perspective from Octalysis Design
This post was written by Erik van Mechelen and takes the lens of Octalysis, a human-focused design framework built by Yu-kai Chou. From first principles Management is meant to facilitate the best use of people and their skills/talents toward productivity in pursuit of an organization’s objectives. This is what management is (in my words). Management fits into a larger structural system, which could be flat or hierarchical or hybrid. (Big misconception: Holacracy = Flat…it doesn’t.) I previously wrote about the Holacracy experiment at Zappos led by Tony Hsieh, which took about 2.5 years to get up and running for a 1,000-employee company. What distinguishes a framework that works in one instance but not another? In this article, I’ll take a think through some possibilities in the context of Zappos’s continued experiment with Holacracy and Medium’s decision to abort it. What is all the fuss about? First, we need not be results-oriented. To nullify the largest misconception And this one: Related
Ahead of the curve: The future of performance management
What happens after companies jettison traditional year-end evaluations? The worst-kept secret in companies has long been the fact that the yearly ritual of evaluating (and sometimes rating and ranking) the performance of employees epitomizes the absurdities of corporate life. Managers and staff alike too often view performance management as time consuming, excessively subjective, demotivating, and ultimately unhelpful. In these cases, it does little to improve the performance of employees. It may even undermine their performance as they struggle with ratings, worry about compensation, and try to make sense of performance feedback. These aren’t new issues, but they have become increasingly blatant as jobs in many businesses have evolved over the past 15 years. Yet nearly nine out of ten companies around the world continue not only to generate performance scores for employees but also to use them as the basis for compensation decisions. Answers are emerging. But change they must.
Proposition d'un modèle d'intelligence collective pour les écosystèmes d'affaires
La robustesse des EA s’appuie sur trois pratiques fortement ancrées dans ces communautés et qui leur sont originales : un management des connaissances communautaire, de la coopétition et une confiance écosystémique. Ces trois éléments constituent les sources de l’intelligence collective, ceux qui permettent de résoudre les trois problèmes de cognition, coordination et coopération. 2.1 - Management communautaire des connaissances Le management de la connaissance désigne un système d’information composé d’outils, de procédures et de pratiques pour la gestion, en particulier le partage en interne, de l’information et de la connaissance dans l’organisation, en vue d’améliorer sa performance, notamment en favorisant l’apprentissage collectif et la transformation de la connaissance tacite en une connaissance explicite. Zara (2008) remarque que le management de la connaissance interagit fortement avec l’intelligence collective pour former une organisation ou une communauté intelligente :
Best Practices: Holacracy, Collaboration, Change Management, and Remote Work – Learning and Resource Library
With tools and strategies bringing teams together, it's important to understand the various management paradigms that exist. Having this knowledge will help you adopt a model that fits best with your team culture. This guide will walk you through one of these paradigms, Holacracy, including: To get started, let's go over some common reasons people lean towards self-managed paradigms: Holacracy eliminates the need to compare and evaluate based on position, rank, relative power, seniority, or status within a team. Holacracy's challenge to other management paradigms: "What if everyone was accountable?" Often management paradigms don't view accountability as being individually held - at the end of the day it's up to managers and supervisors to make sure their teams deliver. Collaboration is a top priority as teams grow. Collaboration breaks down silos of "jobs to be done" within teams and roles. Collaboration creates a bedrock of trust amongst teammates' capabilities. What do I do next?
Kabinet presenteert lijst met eerlijke kledingmerken | Economie
Volkskrant.nl gebruikt cookies om u een optimale gebruikerservaring te bieden Ja, ik accepteer cookies Volkskrant.nl gebruikt cookies en vergelijkbare technologieën (cookies) onder andere om u een optimale gebruikerservaring te bieden. Ook kunnen we hierdoor het gedrag van bezoekers vastleggen en analyseren en daardoor onze website verbeteren. De serviceafdeling is te bereiken op telefoonnummer 088-0561561.
