Sociocracy or ”Dynamic Governance”
Frands Frydendal, Denmark
Ceramics Designer, Physical Therapist, Writer, Social Activist
Ecovillage Movement (Denmark and Europe).
Associations for users and survivors of Psychiatry.
Ineffective, frustrating meetings.
Hierarchies, that accumulate power, reject
Too many written rules to remember for old
Too many unwritten rules to respect for new
A system of governance that:
1: Uses equivalence consent process to
decide on policy and authority (inequality).
Allows and defines qualified leadership.
2: Subdivides in semi-self-organizing circles
3: Consistently uses feed-back loops.
Invention and inspiration
Gerard Endenburg, dutchman.
Invented and developed sociocracy in 1960'es and onwards
”Act, learn and respond”
”predict and control”
Perfection is the enemy of the good.
Process structure (consent)
Small groups (>40)
Systematic communication (double links)
The leading edge
A fair and participatory decision
A clear statement of vision, mission
and aim (purpose, goal, objectives...?)
A clear definition of responsibility –
general and for each person.
How to create a common aim
Vision: Look outward and into the future.
– What does the world look like, because
of our work?
Mission: Look towards ourselves.
– What is our work, to create this change?
Aim: What outcome do we want to deliver,
when – or first?
Sociocracy consent decision
(as different from consensus)
At the time of decision, all decisions must include:
Date for feed-back
Decision process: Formally structured debate.
Later, on time of evaluation: Evaluation primarily on criteria.
Ask for objections, not for consensus.
Objections must be paramount and argued.
Objections are welcomed as contributions to
improvement of proposal
Objections cannot block a proposal.
Emotional resistance is valid.
Negotiate: ”How could we improve the
proposal to satisfy your objection?”
Consent decision – proposal
Clarifying questions. Proposer answers to each.
Short reactions: ”I (don't) like it because...”
Possible quick amendment of proposal
Ask for objections
1. round: ”No objection”. ”I have an objection.”
Note down names.
2. round: Note down objection arguments
3. round: Negotiate objections one by one.
Consent decision – election
No volunteering before the process!
Facilitator: Describe role
Write nominations on paper slip: ”I (name) nominate (name).”
Submit paper slips to facilitator.
Round: Arguments in favour of nominees.
Round: Does anyone want to change nomination?
Facilitator makes proposal based on arguments
Objection round. Negotiations.
Equality and Hierarchy
Operational meetings. IN our roles.
Each decides within his area of expertise and work.
Coordination of tasks and activities to reach the functional
aims of the circle.
Governance/circle meetings meetings. OUT of roles, equal.
Common decision on allocation of authority. roles and
responsibilities, ”rules of the game” - in this circle.
Double link roles:
Elected in mother circle, holds perspective of mother
circle and its more abstract aim.
may get decision power if circle consents to it.
Elected in daughter circle. Holds perspective of
daughter circle in meetings in mother circle.
Other roles, for example:
Roles, special to the circle
Ownership & economy
Orgs self-owning, free beings, foundations.
Persons are ”partners”.
Working partners or
”Profit” is measured aim-achievement (not only
Sharing profit in circle decisions.
Guaranteed Base Wage
2 levels of Incentive adding: STM and LTM (Short
and Long Term Measurement).
Book: ”We The People” - Consenting to a deeper Democracy. By John Buck
and Sharon Villines
World wide web: Just google ”Sociocracy”. Find...
Frands Frydendal email: email@example.com