Integral Theory (Ken Wilber) Holacracy has incorporated concepts of Ken Wilber’s Integral Theory [9, 3, 4, 2]. First of all, the name Holacracy refers to the concept of a holon. Fuhs  defines the concept of a holon as an entity that is simultaneously a whole and also part of a larger whole. In Holacracy, the circles are the holons, and a hierarchy of holons is called a holarchy. Holacracy, taken literally, means governance by the organiza- tional holarchy, the organizational entity itself. Robertson states in  that Holacracy aspires to facilitate the emergence of a natural consciousness for the organization it- self: “This organizational ‘will’ feels clearly different from the will of the people associated with the organization – just as the organization persists even as individ- uals come and go, so too does this consciousness.” This concept contradicts with the traditional concept where some members of the organization dominate the will of the organization . Cardoso and Ferrer report that from an integral perspec- tive, Holacracy substitutes the artificial pressure exerted by leadership by distributing healthy tensions throughout the organization, which allows for constant learning and innovation . Sociocracy (Gerard Endenburg) Sociocracy is a governance structure developed by Gerard Endenburg. According to Endenburg (and also according to Senge ), the traditional top-down structure of organizations limits the learning ability of the organization. The structure of Socioc- racy is based on a hierarchy of circles. A circle is a policy-making unit of a group of people with a common work objective . Holacracy has incorporated and refined practices of Sociocracy regarding circles and circle meetings [9, 8, 6]: Concept of a hierarchy of self-organizing teams in circles. Effective meetings where decisions are made based on consent. Elections by consent. Circle meetings maintain the quality of its resources by means of integral edu- cation. Synchronization of circles through double-linking.
DOES HOLACRACY WORK? 21 In consent-based decision-making decisions are made when nobody has a reasoned objection against the proposed decision. This requires to integrate all perspectives into the decision-making process . In consensus-based decision-making every- body has to be in favor of the decision, which could lead to individuals getting emotionally involved, arguing about which decision is best. The goal of consent- based decision-making is not to find the best decision, but to make small working decisions rapidly and let the best decision emerge over time . Robertson notes that consent-based decision-making is a critical rule in order to be able to embrace Holacracy’s concept of dynamic steering, because small and rapid decisions enable rapid feedback.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 14 pages?
- Spring '18