Question

What are the strengths and limitations of the traditional approaches to work organization?

Answer 1

卄乇ㄥㄥㄖ

We consider the “building blocks of self management” to be the following:

Autonomy of execution: once an objective has been delegated to someone, they can decide how to achieve the goal within the agreed-upon constraintsNo “people managers”Autonomy of role selectionNo explicit mechanism for setting enterprise level strategy and objectives

Few organizations apply all four of these propositions; a wider range of self-managed organizations apply one or more. For example, our organization primarily employs building block “1,” but we certainly view 4 as essential, have a flexible system of people management that focuses on development, and view role selection as a collaborative process. In contrast, at Valve, the software company, strategy is largely emergent and autonomy of role selection is enthusiastically embraced.

Holacracy distributes authority not just by taking power out of the hands of a leader and giving it to someone else or even to a group. Rather, the seat of power shifts from a person at the top to a process, which is defined in detail in a written constitution. Holacracy’s constitution is a generic document applicable to any organization wishing to use the method; once formally adopted, the Holacracy constitution acts as the core rulebook for the organization. Its rules and processes reign supreme, and trump even the person who adopted it. Like a constitutionally backed congress defining laws that even a president can’t ignore, so too does the Holacracy constitution define a seat of authority for the organization as resting in a legislative process, not an autocratic ruler.

If one views traditional hierarchy as a corrosive force that will seep back into an organization if there isn’t a sufficiently airtight alternative, then it becomes essential to have a procedure that’s robust enough to become the repository for authority and can serve as a bulwark against the reemergence of traditional hierarchy.

Let’s look at Holacracy through the lens of the four propositions:

Holacracy establishes autonomy of execution (proposition 1), with mechanisms to surface and process “tensions” (“a gap between how things are and how they could be”) that ensure the owners of roles respond in tight, frequent ways to the externalities their decisions create for othersHolacracy has no people managers (proposition 2). Different forms of performance management can be layered on top of the basic Holacracy “operating system” as “apps,” but in no case will one individual deploy, direct and evaluate another in the traditional boss-subordinate modelHolacracy does not have autonomy of role selection (proposition 3) and instead has a formal and elaborate governance process by which roles are defined and people appointed to rolesHolacracy creates a context in which enterprise-level strategy and objectives do not have the same stability and force they have in conventionally managed enterprises (proposition 4)

Answer 2

${\huge {\mathfrak {Answer :-}}}$

➡️ Traditional approaches to work organisation

The industrial model of the human resource management traditional approach, applicable to blue-collared factory workers, is a controlled work atmosphere marked by narrow, rigid job definitions and detailed workplace rules and procedures. Workers have much autonomy and deviating from the written policy and procedure attract disciplinary action, with discretion remaining an exclusive prerogative of management. The trade union dominates collective bargaining settlements define pay scales, and seniority decides promotion opportunities.

The salaried model of the human resource management traditional approach, applicable to white-collar jobs have less rigid terms of employment and broadly defined job descriptions, but the basic concept of a tightly defined work structure in terms of written job responsibilities and sticking to the brief, with only top managers considered competent to take major decisions remains. Merit, as determined by the performance appraisal procedure and educational qualifications, ranks paramount in deciding promotions and pay fixation.