Wow. The section "Political Impotence" describes the experience of working in a well-functioning "structureless organization", and it sounds a lot like the desc

Wow. The section "Political Impotence" describes the experience of working in a well-functioning "structureless organization", and it sounds a lot like the descriptions of early-stage startups. (Chunks omitted with ellipses for brevity; go check out the whole thing!) "While working in this kind of group is a very heady experience, it is also rare and very hard to replicate. There are almost inevitably four conditions found in such a group: 1. It is task oriented. Its function is very narrow and very specific, like putting on a conference or putting out a newspaper. It is the task that basically structures the group... 2. It is relatively small and homogeneous. Homogeneity is necessary to ensure that participants have a “common language” or interaction. ...too great a diversity among members of a task-oriented group means only that they continually misunderstand each other... If everyone knows everyone else well enough to understand the nuances, these can be accommodated. Usually, they only lead to confusion and endless hours spent straightening out conflicts no one ever thought would arise. 3. There is a high degree of communication... This is only possible if the group is small and people practically live together for the most crucial phases of the task....Successful groups can be as large as 10 or 15, but only when they are in fact composed of several smaller subgroups which perform specific parts of the task, and whose members overlap with each other so that knowledge of what the different subgroups are doing can be passed around easily. 4. There is a low degree of skill specialization. Not everyone has to be able to do everything, but everything must be able to be done by more than one person..."