2 ms·

It's not a punchline at all. If HOAs are pure democracy, and businesses should be as democratic as possible, then naturally the ideal structure of a business is

by Xirdus 2mo ago

It's not a punchline at all. If HOAs are pure democracy, and businesses should be as democratic as possible, then naturally the ideal structure of a business is very close to HOA, if not identical to HOA. As far as I know, the vast majority of HOAs fall into "exists only on paper" category, where they have virtually no rules and do virtually nothing except the basic necessities, sometimes they also maintain shared spaces and that's it. They don't even have regular meetings most of the time, only special ones. This is obviously not how a sustainable business can be run. Of the remaining ones (which is a tiny minority of the grand total), the vast majority are exactly like the horror stories you hear - corruption, nepotism, stupid rules with selective enforcement, interpersonal politics getting in the way of actually getting things done. If a business was run like a HOA, since it cannot be the first kind, I predict it would usually devolve to this within a few years. I honestly never heard of a single case where HOA 1) does a lot, 2) has comprehensive rules, 3) actually enforces the rules, and 4) isn't a horror story. So I really don't know how such a HOA would operate, what the governance structure would be, how enthusiastic people would be to participate and exercise their voting rights, or how it all would translate into a business. If you know of a case like this, or have a theory how it would play out, please share!

wredcoll 2mo ago
I think HOA discussion is rather getting away from the original point. Presumably if you were running a corporation as a democracy you'd just go through the same basic stages as a city-state where you rapidly end up with representatives serving terms. This sort of thing depends wildly on the size/number of people involved of course. A 5-10 person company doesn't really need much in the way of a power structure, presumably everyone knows what needs to be done and you probably have different specialties anyways so you consult each other when required and then each person does their thing. Perhaps occasionally you need some kind of tie breaking vote. A manufacturing company employing 50,000 people at every level from (ceo of 50,000 person company) to (effectively minimum wage bolt tightener) is going to need more authority explicitly defined and delegated. Spending 5 minutes thinking about it, you'd pass the equivalent of a law saying "everyone in this class of (bolt tighteners) must work 20+ hours a week and gets paid $xx.00 an hour and so on and so forth and if they fail to adhere to this then x, y and z happens then get fired". This law could be passed either by a direct vote or more likely created by a body of representatives. I don't know offhand of any business that runs this explicitly as a democracy, there's various co-op businesses that do exist but I've never investigated how exactly they run these things. I don't see anything stopping you from having a company that elects its ceo though.
- Xirdus 2mo ago
  Cooperation is easy when everybody cooperates and has the same goals. Even in a 100% privately owned company with strict hierarchy and egomaniacal CEO. The problems start when the goals stop aligning or people stop cooperating. And it doesn't sound like you paid any thought to what happens then in a democratic setting. For example, those bolt tighteners. The joint vote by the tire balancers, CNC operators and facility maintainers has beat the opposition and a resolution was passed that excludes bolt tighteners from annual bonus. Or the bolt tighteners have joined with delivery drivers and passed a rule requiring a certain number of bolts in all new designs whether they make sense or not. Or a hundred other ways in which people can use their vote to put their own self-interest above the shared good. What are the main forces that keep a democratic workplace like the one you described from collapsing due to bad votes and bad rules?
  - wredcoll 2mo ago
    > What are the main forces that keep a democratic workplace like the one you described from collapsing due to bad votes and bad rules? The same forces that keep autocratic ones from collapsing due to incompetent owners making bad decisions, which is to say, nothing at all. I'm too lazy to look up actual stats, but its well known that "most" businesses fail, and if you extens the timeframe long enough they all fail, so this isn't really a problem I need to solve. A more real problem, if you need one, is probably involving investment to create the company, but that's heavily dependent on the surrounding systems to begin with so where are we stopping this thought experiment?
    - Xirdus 2mo ago
      It feels like you are saying that you are aware that most democratic workplaces would become highly dysfunctional in a short time, and you are okay with it. But then the question is - what exactly is the benefit of workplace democracy if it ends up with high dysfunction just like fully capitalist companies do?
  - shimman 2mo ago
    You're looking at this at the wrong angle, a better lens would be: "can workplace democracy enable workers to live happier lives?" I think optimizing for collaboration, rather than dominion can only be seen as a good thing to allow humans to thrive. Also why are you assuming that parliaments would be the dominating collaboration structure? Your imagination is vastly limited if you're only looking toward western examples. At the opposite end, maybe a question to ask yourself if the current system is leading to good outcomes and for who because the vast majority of Americans are suffering as the result of our current neoliberal economic system that was forced upon us with no consent from the governed. Alternatives should be explored and giving voice to workers seems like the simplest thing we can do. People should be allowed to have a voice in the direction of their employment. Exit is not sufficient. Things can be better, only if we allow it to.

by Xirdus 2mo ago

wredcoll 2mo ago

I think HOA discussion is rather getting away from the original point. Presumably if you were running a corporation as a democracy you'd just go through the same basic stages as a city-state where you rapidly end up with representatives serving terms. This sort of thing depends wildly on the size/number of people involved of course. A 5-10 person company doesn't really need much in the way of a power structure, presumably everyone knows what needs to be done and you probably have different specialties anyways so you consult each other when required and then each person does their thing. Perhaps occasionally you need some kind of tie breaking vote. A manufacturing company employing 50,000 people at every level from (ceo of 50,000 person company) to (effectively minimum wage bolt tightener) is going to need more authority explicitly defined and delegated. Spending 5 minutes thinking about it, you'd pass the equivalent of a law saying "everyone in this class of (bolt tighteners) must work 20+ hours a week and gets paid $xx.00 an hour and so on and so forth and if they fail to adhere to this then x, y and z happens then get fired". This law could be passed either by a direct vote or more likely created by a body of representatives. I don't know offhand of any business that runs this explicitly as a democracy, there's various co-op businesses that do exist but I've never investigated how exactly they run these things. I don't see anything stopping you from having a company that elects its ceo though.

Xirdus 2mo ago
Cooperation is easy when everybody cooperates and has the same goals. Even in a 100% privately owned company with strict hierarchy and egomaniacal CEO. The problems start when the goals stop aligning or people stop cooperating. And it doesn't sound like you paid any thought to what happens then in a democratic setting. For example, those bolt tighteners. The joint vote by the tire balancers, CNC operators and facility maintainers has beat the opposition and a resolution was passed that excludes bolt tighteners from annual bonus. Or the bolt tighteners have joined with delivery drivers and passed a rule requiring a certain number of bolts in all new designs whether they make sense or not. Or a hundred other ways in which people can use their vote to put their own self-interest above the shared good. What are the main forces that keep a democratic workplace like the one you described from collapsing due to bad votes and bad rules?
- wredcoll 2mo ago
  > What are the main forces that keep a democratic workplace like the one you described from collapsing due to bad votes and bad rules? The same forces that keep autocratic ones from collapsing due to incompetent owners making bad decisions, which is to say, nothing at all. I'm too lazy to look up actual stats, but its well known that "most" businesses fail, and if you extens the timeframe long enough they all fail, so this isn't really a problem I need to solve. A more real problem, if you need one, is probably involving investment to create the company, but that's heavily dependent on the surrounding systems to begin with so where are we stopping this thought experiment?
  - Xirdus 2mo ago
    It feels like you are saying that you are aware that most democratic workplaces would become highly dysfunctional in a short time, and you are okay with it. But then the question is - what exactly is the benefit of workplace democracy if it ends up with high dysfunction just like fully capitalist companies do?
- shimman 2mo ago
  You're looking at this at the wrong angle, a better lens would be: "can workplace democracy enable workers to live happier lives?" I think optimizing for collaboration, rather than dominion can only be seen as a good thing to allow humans to thrive. Also why are you assuming that parliaments would be the dominating collaboration structure? Your imagination is vastly limited if you're only looking toward western examples. At the opposite end, maybe a question to ask yourself if the current system is leading to good outcomes and for who because the vast majority of Americans are suffering as the result of our current neoliberal economic system that was forced upon us with no consent from the governed. Alternatives should be explored and giving voice to workers seems like the simplest thing we can do. People should be allowed to have a voice in the direction of their employment. Exit is not sufficient. Things can be better, only if we allow it to.