Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Better for peers governance is the new black

36 views

Published on

Principle of consent is key for work which affects others. In the absence of an objection you can proceed. If there is an objection, it needs to be checked and if valid (paramount and reasoned), integrated into the proposal. By doing this you use the collective intelligence of all involved, leading to higher engagement and quality of your decisions and work. From consent (consent to what where, based on what?) you come to criteria of shared concern/domain and roles. And from there you can refine the criteria further. Try to think consent further, what would it mean for X.? What might we do? This can mean elect leaders, define your own salary etc. etc.

Sociocracy, governance, consent, Kees Boeke, Gerard Endenburg, Sociocratic Circle Method, S3, Sociocracy 3.0, Holacracy

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

Better for peers governance is the new black

  1. 1. Better for peers: governance is the new black ● Vincent van der Lubbe (47, dutch) ● Consultant - Making management easier ● Chair Sociocracy for All, a non-profit membership organisation with the mission to make sociocracy accessible 1
  2. 2. Expectations & Experience What would you like to know before we begin? What do you know about sociocracy? What would you like to have happen for this session?
  3. 3. What does sociocracy mean? Socio - cracy Companion/Peer - rule/govern
  4. 4. Better for peers: Governance is the new black
  5. 5. Who might know about this? “Rules for living together” For people living / collaborating together we have several thousand years of experience in … ● Family life ● Local communities sharing resources ● Religious communities And we are all coming from tribalism...
  6. 6. Let’s look at Sociocracy
  7. 7. Context(ualist approach) It’s about conversations between different actors/peers about their concerns in their specific environment/context who try to create a desired future (together).
  8. 8. Excerpt “Sociocracy: Democracy as It Might Be” We are so accustomed to majority rule as a necessary part of democracy that it is difficult to imagine any democratic system working without it. It is true that it is better to count heads than to break them, and democracy, even as it is today, has much to recommend it as compared with former practices. But the party system has proved very far from providing the ideal democracy of people’s dreams. Its weaknesses have become clear enough: endless debates in Parliament, mass meetings in which the most primitive passions are aroused, the overruling by the majority of all independent views, capricious and unreliable election results, government action rendered inefficient by the minority’s persistent opposition. Strange abuses also creep in. Not only can a party obtain votes by deplorably underhanded methods, but, as we all know, a dictator can win an election with an “astonishing” majority by intimidation. Source: https://www.sociocracy.info/sociocracy-democracy-kees-boeke/
  9. 9. Excerpt “Sociocracy: Democracy as It Might Be” The fact is that we have taken the present system for granted for so long that many people do not realize that the party system and majority rule are not an essential part of democracy. If we really wish to see the whole population united, like a big family, in which the members care for each other’s welfare as much as for their own, we must set aside the quantitative principle of the right of the greatest number and find another way of organizing ourselves. This solution must be really democratic in the sense that it must enable each one of us to share in organizing the community. But this kind of democracy will not depend on power, not even the power of the majority. It will have to be a real community-democracy, an organization of the community by the community itself. For this concept I shall use the word “sociocracy.” Such a concept would be of little value if it had never been tried out in practice. But its validity has been successfully demonstrated over the years. Source: https://www.sociocracy.info/sociocracy-democracy-kees-boeke/
  10. 10. The challenge “The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology.” E.O. Wilson
  11. 11. Sociocracy’s two big strands before Endenburg 1. Social ideals: create a better world 2. Science: based on “positivism”, world of passive causality and “facts” (rest not relevant) Forms of this - unanimity/consensus (1) - practiced in: ● religious community (Quaker practice) ● schools (Boeke’s Werkplaats)
  12. 12. Your typical form of governance ● Autocratic - very efficient/fast, “stupid ruler”, power corrupts ● Democratic (majority rule) - inefficient, create lot of losers, divisive, not taking care of minority enough, majority justifies own mediocre (what they have in common = “populism”)? ● Consensus - everybody agree, no loser, takes long time, not always possible, group think - people conform, ● Meritocratic - well prepared people, work hard = good rewards, does not exist in real world (work is not enough, PR, where you come from), we are all specialists (short sighted by definition), lot of losers, used to justify status quo ● …? ● Random ● Let it happen - Tao is pushing
  13. 13. Gerard Endenburg (1933) ● Went to school in Boeke’s Werkplaats ● Parents buy company to show that you can manage a business differently ● Practices sociocracy in his parents’ company ● Brings cybernetics to Sociocracy: active causality
  14. 14. Nodes in a network: how do you manage them?
  15. 15. 1. CONSENT
  16. 16. Sociocracy is not just a decision making process... Consent = having no objection Objection “No way” Range of Tolerance “I can live with it” Personal Preference “My choice”
  17. 17. Let’s look at Sociocracy
  18. 18. Sociocracy 1. Decisions by consent - no overburdening/ignoring 2. Circle structure, interconnected Circles - describe the domain (boundaries) with a shared interest/aim 3. Open elections (by consent) - nomination of people in the domain / with reasons 4. Double link between circles - role of leader (effectiveness) and delegate (equivalence)
  19. 19. Objections and tensions Where do they come from? What would we like to have happen? And when that happens, then what happens?
  20. 20. Holacracy
  21. 21. Criteria for proposals ● Good enough for now ● Safe enough to try ● Not losing an opportunity to learn
  22. 22. 2. CIRCLES/ROLES WITH DOMAIN AND AIM
  23. 23. 3. OPEN ELECTIONS (BY CONSENT)
  24. 24. Selection process T1 Name Facilitator Secretary Mark - c Ruth | - Pat Evans | Mark Pat Pingel - c Ruth | - Karen | Mark Karen - c Ruth | - Mark | - Pat Evans - c Ruth | - Mark | - Ruth - c Pat P | - Mark | - Facilitator: facilitates small group meetings Secretary: note-taking during small group exercises Term: one weekend (might be extended) Qualifications Facilitator - manage the agenda - good listener - ability to handle disagreements - knows when to do a round - ability to summarize; bring ideas together Qualifications Secretary - Good listener - able to summarize ideas - accurate recording of information - organized - can type
  25. 25. 4. DOUBLE LINKING
  26. 26. Three key values 1. Equivalence 2. Effectiveness 3. Transparency
  27. 27. Different strands of sociocracy ● Sociocratic Circle Method (minimum structure to make it work in org) ● S3: added some other “patterns” ● Holacracy: specified criteria for objections, formalized a lot of rules, separated operations and governance meetings clearly
  28. 28. “Sociocracy: Democracy as It Might Be” (1945)
  29. 29. Resources - Books
  30. 30. Resources - Books
  31. 31. Website resources https://www.sociocracyforall.org/ https://sociocracy30.org/ https://www.sociocracy.info/
  32. 32. Questions / Feedback Happy to stay in contact and collaborate. Send me an email and add me on: www.linkedin.com/in/vincentvanderlubbe Vincent van der Lubbe Hansei Consulting vincentvanderlubbe.com +34 696 27 88 72 | me@vincentvanderlubbe.com 39@vincentvdlubbe

×