4 ms·

No Managers: Why We Removed Bosses at Treehouse

25 points by mijustin 13y ago

mijustin 13y ago
This is a pretty bold move. Interesting that they felt that management might be the source of cynicism, indifference and politics (I think they might be right). Can't wait to see how this experiment turns out. I wonder if they'll still have Product Managers?
- ryancarson 13y ago
  No sir, no Product Managers.
  - mijustin 13y ago
    Wow. Who decides what gets in the product, and what doesn't? Is there no final say? (anyone can deploy anything they want?)
    - rhizome 13y ago
      It would be interesting to let developers push whatever features they like to wherever they like, and use responsive design and usage tracking to push elements with greater use to the top (and left, optionally) of the page and push those with lesser usage to the bottom or to sub-pages. /spitball
  - teh_klev 13y ago
    Were the staff who worked their way up the management tree compensated for the perceived increase in responsibility? If so, were they required to take salary cuts?
ryancarson 13y ago
I'll explain how decisions on the Product are made. It's a pretty interesting process.
- mijustin 13y ago
  Here? Or in future posts? ;)
brador 13y ago
No managers is nice, but does it scale? Who handles firing?
- NonEUCitizen 13y ago
  Once you've removed managers, there aren't many non-productive people left to fire.
  - bowietrousers 13y ago
    If only this were true. And yes, it's cutely naive and tunnel-visioned to think so. However, I've been in teams where the drag on the ticket was very much a developer. When that happens, you need processes and experienced people in place to fairly manage their performance, help them into contributing more effectively, and if they don't improve, get rid of them. A gaggle of developers are not going to be able to do this. Hell, 50% don't even have the social skills to say hello to each other in the morning.
    - johnjlocke 13y ago
      Or...you could very carefully hire the right people in the first place, people that are motivated to work on their own and believe in the mission of the company, and would be doing the same thing regardless. Vetting hires for temperament and internal qualities as well as skills makes this much more possible.
      - solidspace 13y ago
        ^^^ BINGO
      - bowietrousers 13y ago
        Sounds like the recipe for a monoculture. And people wonder why the Valley gets stick for being exclusive.
    - ryancarson 13y ago
      > you need processes and experienced people in place to fairly manage their performance, help them into contributing more effectively That is only true if you hire folks that aren't self-motivated, driven and talented.
EllaMentry 13y ago
From the image: "There will be teams organized around business goals....and teams organized around what they do (like teaching, video, developer etc.)" Sounds an awful lot like an executive group....(read: managers)
- mijustin 13y ago
  Here's the image: http://media.tumblr.com/82182785894eabe40d94ac3c69f9dc67/tumblr_inline_mtay78bW4g1rneiz8.png http://media.tumblr.com/82182785894eabe40d94ac3c69f9dc67/tum... I don't think it's one executive group; it just sounds like all employees are in teams, and that the teams (as a group) work towards specific goals.
dchymko 13y ago
Great article Ryan. I had heard about the Valve Employee Handbook but never had taken the time to look at it. I just read the thing from front to back and it's pretty incredible. It seems like a pretty good balance between autonomy and making sure short term tasks align with longer term goals. Its also interesting that they do have some concept of hierarchy on project teams but thats its organic and temporary. Looking forward to your future posts to see how you guys implement it!
ruppy 13y ago
As someone already said, it is a very bold move. Being in a manger role myself, I have often wondered about the value the managers add and my conclusion is it depends on the company. In a large company, managers are there to protect, support and develop their people - not to get in their way. Though, I will also admit that very few managers are actually good at that. If you are a small company with very smart people, with little to no bureaucracy then you can easily get away with no managers. In an environment where the loudest voice gets heard the most, you probably do need 'good' managers.

25 points by mijustin 13y ago

This is a pretty bold move. Interesting that they felt that management might be the source of cynicism, indifference and politics (I think they might be right). Can't wait to see how this experiment turns out. I wonder if they'll still have Product Managers?

ryancarson 13y ago
No sir, no Product Managers.
- mijustin 13y ago
  Wow. Who decides what gets in the product, and what doesn't? Is there no final say? (anyone can deploy anything they want?)
  - rhizome 13y ago
    It would be interesting to let developers push whatever features they like to wherever they like, and use responsive design and usage tracking to push elements with greater use to the top (and left, optionally) of the page and push those with lesser usage to the bottom or to sub-pages. /spitball
- teh_klev 13y ago
  Were the staff who worked their way up the management tree compensated for the perceived increase in responsibility? If so, were they required to take salary cuts?

ryancarson 13y ago

I'll explain how decisions on the Product are made. It's a pretty interesting process.

mijustin 13y ago
Here? Or in future posts? ;)

brador 13y ago

No managers is nice, but does it scale? Who handles firing?

NonEUCitizen 13y ago
Once you've removed managers, there aren't many non-productive people left to fire.
- bowietrousers 13y ago
  If only this were true. And yes, it's cutely naive and tunnel-visioned to think so. However, I've been in teams where the drag on the ticket was very much a developer. When that happens, you need processes and experienced people in place to fairly manage their performance, help them into contributing more effectively, and if they don't improve, get rid of them. A gaggle of developers are not going to be able to do this. Hell, 50% don't even have the social skills to say hello to each other in the morning.
  - johnjlocke 13y ago
    Or...you could very carefully hire the right people in the first place, people that are motivated to work on their own and believe in the mission of the company, and would be doing the same thing regardless. Vetting hires for temperament and internal qualities as well as skills makes this much more possible.
    - solidspace 13y ago
      ^^^ BINGO
    - bowietrousers 13y ago
      Sounds like the recipe for a monoculture. And people wonder why the Valley gets stick for being exclusive.
  - ryancarson 13y ago
    > you need processes and experienced people in place to fairly manage their performance, help them into contributing more effectively That is only true if you hire folks that aren't self-motivated, driven and talented.

EllaMentry 13y ago

From the image: "There will be teams organized around business goals....and teams organized around what they do (like teaching, video, developer etc.)" Sounds an awful lot like an executive group....(read: managers)

mijustin 13y ago
Here's the image: http://media.tumblr.com/82182785894eabe40d94ac3c69f9dc67/tumblr_inline_mtay78bW4g1rneiz8.png http://media.tumblr.com/82182785894eabe40d94ac3c69f9dc67/tum... I don't think it's one executive group; it just sounds like all employees are in teams, and that the teams (as a group) work towards specific goals.

dchymko 13y ago

Great article Ryan. I had heard about the Valve Employee Handbook but never had taken the time to look at it. I just read the thing from front to back and it's pretty incredible. It seems like a pretty good balance between autonomy and making sure short term tasks align with longer term goals. Its also interesting that they do have some concept of hierarchy on project teams but thats its organic and temporary. Looking forward to your future posts to see how you guys implement it!

ruppy 13y ago

As someone already said, it is a very bold move. Being in a manger role myself, I have often wondered about the value the managers add and my conclusion is it depends on the company. In a large company, managers are there to protect, support and develop their people - not to get in their way. Though, I will also admit that very few managers are actually good at that. If you are a small company with very smart people, with little to no bureaucracy then you can easily get away with no managers. In an environment where the loudest voice gets heard the most, you probably do need 'good' managers.