Part 2 discusses more about forming projects and clarifies that whilst there are no 'formal' managers to cajole people into doing things, there still need to be

Part 2 discusses more about forming projects and clarifies that whilst there are no 'formal' managers to cajole people into doing things, there still need to be 'sticks' to hold groups together. http://ryancarson.com/post/61606695537/how-to-set-priorities-create-budgets-and-do-project http://ryancarson.com/post/61606695537/how-to-set-priorities... I think it's interesting that beneath the tagline of 'people work on whatever they want' there is actually an expectation that peer pressure will prevent this; once you're onboard with a project, you are expected to stay and contribute otherwise you will be penalised in your quarterly reviews. So manager-in-person has been replaced with manager-in-peers. This is also the means by which people are discouraged from working on solo projects; since no-one can really rate them at review time, they'll slip down the rankings. As usual, however, no discussion about how boring regulatory things are done. Edit: actually that last statement was incorrect, sorry . If there is such a need then management is imposed: There isn’t any top-down prioritization (unless we are required by law to act on an issue or some “red alert” type work is required, which should be rare)