Replied to How you do anything is how you do everything (Doug Belshaw’s Thought Shrapnel)

Many people no longer live in a world of the ‘permanent job’ and ‘career ladder’. What counts as success for them is not necessarily a steadily-increasing paycheck, but measures such as social justice or ‘making a dent in the universe’. This is where hierarchy fails, and where emergent, emotionally-intelligent leaders with teams of self-organising ducks, thrive.

This is a great piece Doug. So many things to consider, such as who to hire:

When hiring, I try to do so in one of three ways. Ideally, I want to hire people with whom at least one member of the existing team has already worked and can vouch for. If that doesn’t work, then I’m looking for people vouched for my the networks of which the team are part. Failing that, I’m trying to find people who don’t wait for direction, but know how to get on with things that need doing.(source)

And the association between emotional intelligence and hierarchy:

Developing emotional intelligence is difficult and goodness knows I’m no expert. What I think we perhaps need to do is to remove our corporate dependency on hierarchy. In hierarchies, emotion and trust is removed as an impediment to action.(source)

Personally speaking I find I can be like a camel, where left to my own accord I will always find something that needs to be done and only really need to be checked on every so often. The problem I have is that I hit the ‘process’ wall, where something requires some sort of hierarchy or authority to progress things further.

What I have come to wonder is the place of process in a flat structure. Not having worked in a truly flat environment (I have had a few leaders and managers who encourage self-management, but that is it), is hierarchy replaced by clear and repeatable collectively agreed processes that people are able to use to guide them? That might be my submission for a microcast response.

Replied to Hierarchies and large organisations by Doug Belshaw (Thought Shrapnel)

[W]orking in a group of 10 people within a large organization feels both right and wrong at the same time. On the surface it feels like the kind of group you’re meant to work in, but something major is missing. A job at a big company is like high fructose corn syrup: it has some of the qualities of things you’re meant to like, but is disastrously lacking in others.

Paul Graham

Doug, I am wondering what this says about schools? Is there an ideal size for teams and organisations?