3 ms·
Furthermore... the author describes how lack of structure is not even a partial solution, in that it simply fails to solve the problem it's reacting to. An org
by dcposch 8y ago
Furthermore... the author describes how lack of structure is not even a partial solution, in that it simply fails to solve the problem it's reacting to. An org with no formal organization can still have the same unhealthy power dynamics as a traditional hierarchical org.
> Contrary to what we would like to believe, there is no such thing as a structureless group.
> This means that to strive for a structureless group is as useful, and as deceptive, as to aim at an "objective" news story, "value-free" social science, or a "free" economy. A "laissez faire" group is about as realistic as a "laissez faire" society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others.
Wow, what a money line. It's like a Rosetta Stone for a whole family of naive political ideas.
From ancap and the more extreme forms of libertarian thinking on the right, thru "flat organization" in the startup world, to explicitly leaderless leftist groups like Occupy Wall Street.
What they have in common is the fantasy that large human organizations can work without defined leadership.
- ekianjo 8y ago> Wow, what a money line. It's like a Rosetta Stone for a whole family of naive political ideas. I would rather say that it is extremely naive to believe that the systems we have inherited are optimal in any way.
- dcposch 8y agoNobody's saying the systems we've inherited are optimal. What we (all four--me, the comment I'm replying to, the Tyranny of Structureless essay, and the article about Valve) -- what we're saying is that "no system" is not an improvement.
- humanrebar 8y agoSystems, institutions, and cultures evolve to fit their environments better than alternatives. That's not to say any are perfect or fully optimized. There is room for innovation. As problems are solved, remining problems start getting more attention. And environments change over time. But established approaches are more optimal in at least some respects than failed experiments of the past.
- fsloth 8y agoI think it goes both ways. You cannot develop new systems by designing them around fantasy psychology that you implicitly presume will take over everyone in the new scheme. New schemes are certainly a good idea if they actually improve on the current models and are based on reality and not fantasy or malfeasant popularism.
- wpietri 8y agoThat's a false dichotomy. There's enough naivety out there to fuel both pro- and anti-status-quo positions.
- bumholio 8y ago> It's like a Rosetta Stone for a whole family of naive political ideas. From ancap and the more extreme forms of libertarian thinking on the right, thru "flat organization" in the startup world, to explicitly leaderless leftist groups like Occupy Wall Street. You just earned enemies and downvotes from the entire political spectrum. I'm onboard, let the martyrdom commence.
- WJW 8y agoI think this fantasy persists because it is sometimes true, for a short period of time or for small groups of people. However, such a state is like a body without an immune system: it will happily continue along its path until it encounters a disease and then it gets ill. Likewise, a leaderless group can work very well for a while until someone joins the group who will put their own interests before that of the group. Then the group has much less capable defenses than a traditional hierarchy since by definition there is no leader to expel the new person. The chance a group meets such a person is clearly dependent on both the size of the group and the lifetime of the group. In physical terms you might say that such groups are in an unstable equilibrium: any pertubation away from perfect harmony leads to a total collapse because there is no more benefit to cooperating if there are non-cooperators present.
- picsao 8y agoA classic hierarchy is the worst case of your scenario.. A bad actor has taken over and deform the organization to serve his interests.