Structurelessness is a bad idea. It's taking some good concepts (open allocation, self-direction) too far. It means that management is lazy and absent rather th

Structurelessness is a bad idea. It's taking some good concepts (open allocation, self-direction) too far. It means that management is lazy and absent rather than aware, principled, and effective. Open allocation still requires management to keep it open. Closed allocation is worse and basically terrible, because there's an inherent conflict of interest between people and project management. Advocating for 10 people, and having to make those 10 people deliver on a specific executive mandate, has a person serving two masters. It might be that the best thing for a person is to change projects, but that conflicts with the manager's need to manage up and won't happen. You still need people who can protect the good (sheepdogs). Always. I don't care how flat an organization is, there has got to be someone who, if harassment occurs or someone is impeding others' work, says "Not fucking acceptable". The problem is that it's really hard to give someone that power and not have it be abused.