5 ms·

Almost all of the jobs I've had have been with small "non-hierarchical" groups. In all of them, the founders have insisted that there was no hierarchy where cle

Almost all of the jobs I've had have been with small "non-hierarchical" groups. In all of them, the founders have insisted that there was no hierarchy where clearly there was. When I've tried to explain this to them, they've been incapable of perceiving it. Even at my current corporate job, it's the same situation, but by now I've learned that you just need to take power. The one source of legitimate power you do have as an employee, especially in our industry, is the power to leave. These days I cultivate a kind "I don't give a shit" attitude that works pretty well.

guynamedloren 13y ago
Interested to hear about how you wield this power. Do you use it as a threat, or are you saying that you just simply leave?
- msutherl 13y ago
  Well, what is power? In this case it's the ability of somebody to say what you can and cannot do. But there are complexities in a non-hierarchical organization which lacks management structure. Those in power may not think they have power, they may not have much information about what you are doing, they may not have a clear way to tell you what to do. Power is implicit and soft. The rules only exist insofar as you interpret them from the environment and you follow them by your own accord, fearing imagined consequences. Succeeding in this kind of organization requires not only jockeying for position, but more subtly, overcoming the self-imposed coercion. This is where irreverence comes in handy. Once you eradicate fear, you can afford to take the risks required to freely design your relationship with your colleagues such that you have sufficient power. Ultimately you want them to trust you and you want to be able to challenge them on any topic. You want respect, and people respect excellence, confidence, and risk-taking. If for whatever reason you're working with people who are incapable of collaborating, your irreverence will either be taken as a threat that may change their behavior in your favor, or otherwise you can leave and it won't seem out of the blue.
kamaal 13y ago
The problem with non-hierarchical groups is the behind-the-scenes leaders, whom the powers-that-are trust. And therefore automatically unofficially become leaders. It looks like officially he isn't the boss, but for almost all practical purpose he is. The worst thing that happens in such places is, those people using their power to help their buddies, gangs and yes men for their own benefit and political power. If you are not one of them you are screwed.
- mtrimpe 13y ago
  The thing is that this exists just as well in hierarchical groups though. I've yet to encounter an organization where the hierarchical structure accurately represents the actual power structure. What's happening here is that in flat organizations it's the -only- power structure and thus becomes more pronounced to our brains which are hard-wired to pattern match for the social power structures. Another way of looking at this is to see the hierarchical power structure as an abstraction that evolved to address the discomfort (some) people have with a more fluid power structure like at Valve. The interesting part here is that different people have different tolerance for this though; so much so that it's one of Hofstede's main cultural dimensions called 'Power distance'. [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_dimensions_theory#Dimensions_of_national_cultures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_dimension...
  - hannibal5 13y ago
    Formal hierarchies allow better distribution of responsibility and separation of personal relationships from work relationships. They also enable less politically/socially savvy people to get into powerful positions with their merit. Informal power structures in hierarchal groups have less power and they happen only between peers. In informal hierarchies relationships become personal and political. In anarchy, everything is politics and personal.
    - DrJokepu 13y ago
      Is it actually a good idea to put less politically/socially savvy people into powerful positions?
na85 13y ago
Can you elaborate on your 'tude?
- msutherl 13y ago
  I think it's a combination of signaling superiority with body language, being friendly, greeting people with care and confidence, developing personal relationships, being proactive in meetings and in general, and most importantly just asking for what you want. There was a time when I tried to conform or figure out what other people wanted, but these days I approach people with a clear idea of what I think should be done and say something like: "this is what I'm interested in", with the subtext that I'll just leave if I don't get to do that. It's a kind of "take it or leave it" attitude.
sageikosa 13y ago
No hierarchy doesn't mean no accountability, instead you just surprise visits for the failure you didn't know you were responsible for.

guynamedloren 13y ago

Interested to hear about how you wield this power. Do you use it as a threat, or are you saying that you just simply leave?

msutherl 13y ago
Well, what is power? In this case it's the ability of somebody to say what you can and cannot do. But there are complexities in a non-hierarchical organization which lacks management structure. Those in power may not think they have power, they may not have much information about what you are doing, they may not have a clear way to tell you what to do. Power is implicit and soft. The rules only exist insofar as you interpret them from the environment and you follow them by your own accord, fearing imagined consequences. Succeeding in this kind of organization requires not only jockeying for position, but more subtly, overcoming the self-imposed coercion. This is where irreverence comes in handy. Once you eradicate fear, you can afford to take the risks required to freely design your relationship with your colleagues such that you have sufficient power. Ultimately you want them to trust you and you want to be able to challenge them on any topic. You want respect, and people respect excellence, confidence, and risk-taking. If for whatever reason you're working with people who are incapable of collaborating, your irreverence will either be taken as a threat that may change their behavior in your favor, or otherwise you can leave and it won't seem out of the blue.

kamaal 13y ago

The problem with non-hierarchical groups is the behind-the-scenes leaders, whom the powers-that-are trust. And therefore automatically unofficially become leaders. It looks like officially he isn't the boss, but for almost all practical purpose he is. The worst thing that happens in such places is, those people using their power to help their buddies, gangs and yes men for their own benefit and political power. If you are not one of them you are screwed.

mtrimpe 13y ago
The thing is that this exists just as well in hierarchical groups though. I've yet to encounter an organization where the hierarchical structure accurately represents the actual power structure. What's happening here is that in flat organizations it's the -only- power structure and thus becomes more pronounced to our brains which are hard-wired to pattern match for the social power structures. Another way of looking at this is to see the hierarchical power structure as an abstraction that evolved to address the discomfort (some) people have with a more fluid power structure like at Valve. The interesting part here is that different people have different tolerance for this though; so much so that it's one of Hofstede's main cultural dimensions called 'Power distance'. [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_dimensions_theory#Dimensions_of_national_cultures http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_dimension...
- hannibal5 13y ago
  Formal hierarchies allow better distribution of responsibility and separation of personal relationships from work relationships. They also enable less politically/socially savvy people to get into powerful positions with their merit. Informal power structures in hierarchal groups have less power and they happen only between peers. In informal hierarchies relationships become personal and political. In anarchy, everything is politics and personal.
  - DrJokepu 13y ago
    Is it actually a good idea to put less politically/socially savvy people into powerful positions?

na85 13y ago

Can you elaborate on your 'tude?

msutherl 13y ago
I think it's a combination of signaling superiority with body language, being friendly, greeting people with care and confidence, developing personal relationships, being proactive in meetings and in general, and most importantly just asking for what you want. There was a time when I tried to conform or figure out what other people wanted, but these days I approach people with a clear idea of what I think should be done and say something like: "this is what I'm interested in", with the subtext that I'll just leave if I don't get to do that. It's a kind of "take it or leave it" attitude.

sageikosa 13y ago

No hierarchy doesn't mean no accountability, instead you just surprise visits for the failure you didn't know you were responsible for.