4 ms·

That is a mightily depressing thought, if true. Power imbalances suck; is there truly no way to be rid of them?

vangelis 7y ago
Probably not. You can certainly mitigate the worst of them though. That a totally flat organization is terrible doesn't imply that tall hierarchy is good.
stcredzero 7y ago
Power imbalances suck; is there truly no way to be rid of them? Power imbalances can be mitigated structurally and through community norms based on humanistic principles. If an organization has some sort of "Rule of law" then this can damp down the application of arbitrary power by informal chains of command. Power corrupts. This is why people need structure and limits. When people just start doing as they feel, the power to make their whims real becomes a corrupting power.
insickness 7y ago
Power imbalances don't 'suck.' They evolved to provide advantages. In The Cohesive Foragers: Human and Chimpanzee, Margaret Power writes: "The charismatic-dependent relationship is adaptive toward keeping subgroups together as they range, foraging. If all members of a subgroup were equally self-assured, there would be more of a tendency for each individual to go it’s own way, and a lone animal or human is usually more vulnerable to attack. "The more nervous, easily aroused, dependent chimpanzees, through their quick response to disturbance in the group or to danger from without, act to alert the less easily aroused, less observant, charismatic members. One or more of the confident individuals then respond to the situation, backed by the support of the more dependent members. Thus the response is more by group consensus than leader-initiated."
- claudiawerner 7y ago
  It is entirely possible that evolutionary conferred advantages really do 'suck' in other senses or in certain social situations, which tend to go beyond evolutionary fitness. Indeed a great many things have evolved that would be abhorrent to carry out in civil society; many intuitions (moral and otherwise) we have (even those spread across several cultures) seem correct but are not scientifically grounded. The is-ought problem shows itself again here, and as far as modern conceptions of justice and moral psychology go, social Darwinism has lost a lot of ground in the last fifty years.
lacampbell 7y ago
I'm perfectly fine with people clearly more competent than me making decisions. I don't micromanage my dentist or demand a referendum on the flight route of every plane I am on. At the same token, if I am the most competent in the room I do resent not being the leader. Them's the breaks.
natalyarostova 7y ago
They don't have to. Have you never found a leader who you wanted to be your leader? Who you admired and viewed as worthy of directing you?
- qwsxyh 7y ago
  No.
babyslothzoo 7y ago
Do you really think all power imbalances suck? Should a 2 year old have equal say in household decision making as their 32 year old parent? Should a first year med student who wanders into a patients room have equal sway in patient care as a specialist attending physician? Should an intern be able to make decisions that a CEO typically makes?
- pgcj_poster 7y ago
  I think there's a difference between saying that something sucks and saying that it should never exist. There are probably a lot of people who would agree that taxes "suck" but who would agree that people should pay at least some taxes. As far as I know, it's pretty widely agreed upon that it sucks to be an intern or a first-year med student in field-training. I don't remember being two years old, but I do remember hating having to do what my parents said when I was a child. So I would say that power imbalances do in general, "suck" even if they're desirable in some cases. As such, I'd be sad to learn that there was no way for most people to work in a "flat" structure.

Probably not. You can certainly mitigate the worst of them though. That a totally flat organization is terrible doesn't imply that tall hierarchy is good.

stcredzero 7y ago

Power imbalances suck; is there truly no way to be rid of them? Power imbalances can be mitigated structurally and through community norms based on humanistic principles. If an organization has some sort of "Rule of law" then this can damp down the application of arbitrary power by informal chains of command. Power corrupts. This is why people need structure and limits. When people just start doing as they feel, the power to make their whims real becomes a corrupting power.

insickness 7y ago

Power imbalances don't 'suck.' They evolved to provide advantages. In The Cohesive Foragers: Human and Chimpanzee, Margaret Power writes: "The charismatic-dependent relationship is adaptive toward keeping subgroups together as they range, foraging. If all members of a subgroup were equally self-assured, there would be more of a tendency for each individual to go it’s own way, and a lone animal or human is usually more vulnerable to attack. "The more nervous, easily aroused, dependent chimpanzees, through their quick response to disturbance in the group or to danger from without, act to alert the less easily aroused, less observant, charismatic members. One or more of the confident individuals then respond to the situation, backed by the support of the more dependent members. Thus the response is more by group consensus than leader-initiated."

claudiawerner 7y ago
It is entirely possible that evolutionary conferred advantages really do 'suck' in other senses or in certain social situations, which tend to go beyond evolutionary fitness. Indeed a great many things have evolved that would be abhorrent to carry out in civil society; many intuitions (moral and otherwise) we have (even those spread across several cultures) seem correct but are not scientifically grounded. The is-ought problem shows itself again here, and as far as modern conceptions of justice and moral psychology go, social Darwinism has lost a lot of ground in the last fifty years.

lacampbell 7y ago

I'm perfectly fine with people clearly more competent than me making decisions. I don't micromanage my dentist or demand a referendum on the flight route of every plane I am on. At the same token, if I am the most competent in the room I do resent not being the leader. Them's the breaks.

natalyarostova 7y ago

They don't have to. Have you never found a leader who you wanted to be your leader? Who you admired and viewed as worthy of directing you?

qwsxyh 7y ago
No.

babyslothzoo 7y ago

Do you really think all power imbalances suck? Should a 2 year old have equal say in household decision making as their 32 year old parent? Should a first year med student who wanders into a patients room have equal sway in patient care as a specialist attending physician? Should an intern be able to make decisions that a CEO typically makes?

pgcj_poster 7y ago
I think there's a difference between saying that something sucks and saying that it should never exist. There are probably a lot of people who would agree that taxes "suck" but who would agree that people should pay at least some taxes. As far as I know, it's pretty widely agreed upon that it sucks to be an intern or a first-year med student in field-training. I don't remember being two years old, but I do remember hating having to do what my parents said when I was a child. So I would say that power imbalances do in general, "suck" even if they're desirable in some cases. As such, I'd be sad to learn that there was no way for most people to work in a "flat" structure.