Turquoise Organizations: Examples and Common Answers
I live and work mainly in Irkutsk: in two organizations that can hardly be called classical. One is relatively large: by about, because there are freelancers coming, 20 people have a turnover of several tens of millions of rubles a month, and the second is a hobby that we are trying to monetize with two comrades “in the workshop”.
On Habré there are articles dedicated to the so-called turquoise (there are disputes about color: someone develops the idea to the emerald, someone stops at yellow , but all this particular, and the article is not about that) organizations. They are also called: synergistic, holacratic (not to be confused with ochlocratic). There are posts warning . But still…
Here are a few of them (for those who do not quite know what they are talking about):
')
For a quick acquaintance, you can also watch the video : the most frequent question that gives rise to many others, sounds like this: “where are the working examples ?!”.
Well, here they are:
The second of these should be known to many residents of Habr, because for the it-world she did a lot; there is still Patagonia, Zappos, HolacracyOne, Glassfrog ...
And here are the areas that F. Lalu himself studied:
I deliberately did not specify everything, because it is better to read this book before starting the construction of a BO: in practice, there are indeed many questions.
In Russia, for example, try to apply this experience:
If someone wants to delve into the topic and study the experience more closely, then here is the list , which is literally called “holacracy-cases” (there are, unfortunately, a number of already disconnected sites).
Here is how, for example, a scheme of such an organization might look:
Very often, criticism of the following organizations appears to the address of such organizations: “Turquoise organizations are an exclusively speculative model ... the types of business listed in the article are not business, but some kind of“ pastime ”- consulting, isoterics and all garbage”, but if you look at the list above, it can be seen that this is far from the case.
The second antithesis always consists in the following (the quotations are taken from discussions for publications on the topic on the Web): “Unfortunately, this is of little use in Russia! The deepest roots of our bureaucratic machine can not be pulled out! In such a "turquoise company" will certainly descend the inspector and will require reports, references, etc. And then they will punish them too! .. ”
But, firstly, if you are familiar with the current legislation of the Russian Federation, you probably know that today you can even officially register in the Charter rights and obligations completely differently than before (I think you should talk about this separately some other time). Yes, the CEO is still an important person, but only. Secondly, the BO model does not require violation of the law: it only calls for reducing bureaucratic costs, while inside the company. Say, wherever there is a quality control manager or even a sales manager, he is not needed if the structure of the company allows such links not to be created (an excellent guide on the topic is “Customers for Life”, although this is not entirely about BW).
I will give two simple examples that occurred in the labor world when the “turquoise approach” was born by itself:
In general, one of the most frequent questions that arises among those who are just getting acquainted with a BO is something like the following: “Lalu talks a lot about the characteristics of a turquoise organization, but does not offer a single standard or checklist”, or from the same author: “ the chances that the plans will coincide so much that you will go busting together and merge in spiritual ecstasy are not as high in real life as they are written about in smart books. ” And further: “after all, even in turquoise organizations, someone has to wash the floor, change napkins in the toilet and serve tea to the guests.”
In short, the essence is that there should not be uniform standards: principles - yes, but not standards. In fact, strange as it may sound, these standards are not found in companies that are called “orange” in the same classification. For example, Coca-Cola and IP Ivanov I.I. work as organizations are orange, but will their models coincide where we are talking about standards? Based on experience - no. But the principles are unconditional.
In order to better understand the value of BO, you need to understand what is different:
And this is certainly not all.
But for today I will finish, having designated one more obvious question: "and why it to publish it on Habré?".
I hope that the topic will be interesting and new questions and comments will appear under the article, allowing to expand the range of the studied problems.
PS Where did the points of view come from:
On Habré there are articles dedicated to the so-called turquoise (there are disputes about color: someone develops the idea to the emerald, someone stops at yellow , but all this particular, and the article is not about that) organizations. They are also called: synergistic, holacratic (not to be confused with ochlocratic). There are posts warning . But still…
Here are a few of them (for those who do not quite know what they are talking about):
')
- Actually, about the book by F. Lalu
- About the world in turquoise colors
- People and organizations of the future
- Synergistic organizations
- There are others ...
For a quick acquaintance, you can also watch the video : the most frequent question that gives rise to many others, sounds like this: “where are the working examples ?!”.
Well, here they are:
- http://www.sunhydraulics.com : “There is no organizational chart or formal job descriptions here” (“There is no organizational structure or official job descriptions”)
- http://www.valvesoftware.com : “It’s amazing to happen. We see it every day at Valve ”(“ When we give intelligent and talented people creative freedom without fear of failure, amazing things happen. We see it in Valve every day. ”)
- http://www.favi.com : "FAVI offers each employee the opportunity to be responsible for his / her own progress and success" ("FAVI offers each employee the opportunity to be responsible for his / her own progress and success")
The second of these should be known to many residents of Habr, because for the it-world she did a lot; there is still Patagonia, Zappos, HolacracyOne, Glassfrog ...
And here are the areas that F. Lalu himself studied:
- The medicine
- Metallurgy
- Power industry
- IT (consulting, development, etc.)
- Religious associations
- Food industry
- Industrial production
I deliberately did not specify everything, because it is better to read this book before starting the construction of a BO: in practice, there are indeed many questions.
In Russia, for example, try to apply this experience:
- Sberbank under the direction of G. Gref
- Button (in their own opinion)
- Industrial sales - organizers of turquoise organizations in the city of Irkutsk
- Adventum - performance-agency
- Expedition - "niche sales of a wide profile"
- Tasteville - retail chain
- Pokupo - SaaS solutions for online stores
- And again - others ...
If someone wants to delve into the topic and study the experience more closely, then here is the list , which is literally called “holacracy-cases” (there are, unfortunately, a number of already disconnected sites).
Here is how, for example, a scheme of such an organization might look:
Very often, criticism of the following organizations appears to the address of such organizations: “Turquoise organizations are an exclusively speculative model ... the types of business listed in the article are not business, but some kind of“ pastime ”- consulting, isoterics and all garbage”, but if you look at the list above, it can be seen that this is far from the case.
The second antithesis always consists in the following (the quotations are taken from discussions for publications on the topic on the Web): “Unfortunately, this is of little use in Russia! The deepest roots of our bureaucratic machine can not be pulled out! In such a "turquoise company" will certainly descend the inspector and will require reports, references, etc. And then they will punish them too! .. ”
But, firstly, if you are familiar with the current legislation of the Russian Federation, you probably know that today you can even officially register in the Charter rights and obligations completely differently than before (I think you should talk about this separately some other time). Yes, the CEO is still an important person, but only. Secondly, the BO model does not require violation of the law: it only calls for reducing bureaucratic costs, while inside the company. Say, wherever there is a quality control manager or even a sales manager, he is not needed if the structure of the company allows such links not to be created (an excellent guide on the topic is “Customers for Life”, although this is not entirely about BW).
I will give two simple examples that occurred in the labor world when the “turquoise approach” was born by itself:
- For example, the accountant is usually handed over by an accountant, but the founders themselves (or even other members of the association) can also deliver it exactly. The whole question of standardization and responsibility. But it is possible, because has already.
- Learning: let's say, programmers are developing in different directions and sometimes the help of “senior comrades” is needed, but every time these are different people: let's say, someone knows github features better, and someone has dealt well with unit testing. The question of “advanced training” can be resolved in at least two ways: a) create a separate work unit that will play the role of a teacher (this may be on-site courses, a separate consultant, etc.) or b) do everything with mutual learning. Again it works. In this process there are difficulties, but I will generally answer this and other questions: where are they not?
In general, one of the most frequent questions that arises among those who are just getting acquainted with a BO is something like the following: “Lalu talks a lot about the characteristics of a turquoise organization, but does not offer a single standard or checklist”, or from the same author: “ the chances that the plans will coincide so much that you will go busting together and merge in spiritual ecstasy are not as high in real life as they are written about in smart books. ” And further: “after all, even in turquoise organizations, someone has to wash the floor, change napkins in the toilet and serve tea to the guests.”
In short, the essence is that there should not be uniform standards: principles - yes, but not standards. In fact, strange as it may sound, these standards are not found in companies that are called “orange” in the same classification. For example, Coca-Cola and IP Ivanov I.I. work as organizations are orange, but will their models coincide where we are talking about standards? Based on experience - no. But the principles are unconditional.
In order to better understand the value of BO, you need to understand what is different:
- role of the post (about it - next time)
- punishment liability
- strict hierarchy from "possible decentralized models"
- company pool
And this is certainly not all.
But for today I will finish, having designated one more obvious question: "and why it to publish it on Habré?".
- I am deeply convinced that IT in the IT sector, especially where many people work remotely, should take root and have already taken root pretty well, and IT and Habr are interdependent things;
- Judging by the primary analysis of comments on the articles, there is interest in BO, but there is also an obvious misunderstanding of many points, so I would like to answer some questions now, and leave some questions for further publications;
- Habr, among other things, gives excellent feedback and helps to find like-minded people, and this is not so little as it may seem to someone;
- There are indeed a lot of questions, but most of them can be put together, which means to give at least the most general answers in areas of interest;
- Finally, I would like to show that BO is not an abstraction at all, but a model tested by many years (at least 60 years of practice), which allows not only more efficient, from the point of view of, say, profit, but also more interesting work for all participants.
I hope that the topic will be interesting and new questions and comments will appear under the article, allowing to expand the range of the studied problems.
PS Where did the points of view come from:
- Habr (comments)
- Organizations of the future : How to create a company in which even freelancers will want to work
- HR and turquoise organizations
- The secret of the company with the position of this phenomenon
- Opinion on turquoise self-organization
- Objections on the same topic
- About the book Lalu
- A lively, though not very constructive discussion at Finam.
- Big blog entry
- A note with a comment about freelancers
- And more criticism of the model under discussion.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/323532/
All Articles