0345 646 5201
Self-managed teams – right time, right place?
People Puzzles trialled a ‘self-managed teams’ model to see how it works in practice. Here’s what we found.
If you’ve considered moving away from a traditional management hierarchy in your business, you may have looked at a self-managed way of working. Self-management promises a flatter structure and more collaborative working that empowers people to be highly responsive and quick to pivot.
It is certainly an attractive idea – but how does it work in practice? How do you keep a team on track if there’s no one in charge?
Back in 2018, People Puzzles began looking into self-managed teams (as recounted in our blog at the time) and reading the case studies described in Frédérick Laloux’s influential book, Reinventing Organizations. ‘We knew that some of our clients were interested in this way of working and we wanted to see how the method could somehow be integrated into the way we work,’ says Helen Stenhouse, Director and Co-owner of People Puzzles.
An ideal place to try a self-management model was in the Liberti Group – a collective of sister organisations with a shared purpose and common goals. ‘Liberti is a team of equals,’ explains Helen. ‘It didn’t feel right to have a leader in the traditional sense – but this was causing issues. Even though we had similar ideas, we found we weren’t driving them through effectively.’
Getting started
The group used Holacracy, an organisational corporate governance framework designed to enable teams to self-manage their decision making. Sara Daw, CEO of The Liberti Group, undertook the training. ‘It was a number of sessions over couple of days,’ she explains. ‘These covered guiding principles, the philosophy and the process to approve proposals and move them forward.’ A Holacracy practitioner then helped the group to develop an outline structure and transition into the new way of working.
The method in practice
The basic process works as follows: in a meeting, a proposer presents their idea. Everyone else can then ask clarifying questions and give feedback to that proposal in turn. After all the feedback has been received, the proposer responds. If all the feedback is positive, the proposer has a green light to proceed as proposed. If not, they must amend the proposal accordingly, making it ‘safe enough to try’. This is then opened up to feedback in the same way to see if there is enough buy-in from the group for the amended proposal to pass.
The idea is to generate proposals that move the idea forward to some extent, even if it isn’t as far or in a different way compared to the original proposal. Once implemented, the proposer can bring a further new proposal back to the group to seek approval to move forward again.
This process needs to be followed to the letter and not be derailed in order for it to work properly. A proposal can be amended several times before a decision is reached. But once the decision is made, the proposer has the green light to go forward with what is agreed.
The results
The Group has found this way of working revelatory. ‘It means the decision-making process is very collective,’ says Helen. ‘You hear from people who don’t always speak up in a room of extraverts. But the quiet people in the room often have the best ideas.’
Sara also appreciates the inclusive nature of the process. ‘It’s not top-down – anyone can bring a proposal to the table,’ she says. ‘And once something has been decided, the proposer can run with it as far as has been agreed; no further permission is needed from the group.’
They found the framework particularly useful when making big decisions. ‘We’ve used it to decide the things we want done, our purpose and what to spend time on,’ says Helen.
The challenges
The strict structure can be challenging. ‘Often, the people who are interested in this way of working don’t want the structure that goes along with it,’ says Helen. ‘But when no one person is in charge, you actually need more structure and a robust process to ensure it doesn’t descend into chaos.’
With around 15-20 people present at Liberti meetings, reaching consensus can be time consuming. The sessions also need leading, although Sara points out that she doesn’t lead in the traditional sense. ‘I would describe herself as more of a facilitator in the meetings,’ she says. ‘I don’t take part in the decisions.’
You also have to put faith in the collective wisdom of the group being right, so it’s important to set rules around what a majority looks like, ie whether agreement needs to be unanimous or by majority vote. ‘The way we’ve structured it at Liberti is that a certain number of votes are needed for something to pass,’ says Sara. ‘But there’s always the option to adapt, even if you get a “no” initially.’
Greater productivity
Despite the challenges of working this way, the group have found it easier to make decisions collectively. ‘We are more productive as a group in the past year,’ says Sara. ‘It was more difficult to agree before. This process has allowed the creativity of the group to thrive.’
Under the right circumstances, both Helen and Sara can see how the philosophy could be applied to running a whole business rather than just one team. ‘For the right organisation, where everyone is highly motivated, I can see this working across the board,’ says Helen. ‘I would use it in my business,’ Sara adds. ‘But you really have to be committed to make it work.’
People Puzzles can support organisations moving to a self-managed way of working. We also support leadership teams with a comprehensive people strategy tailored to help their businesses thrive. Find out how People Puzzles can help – call 020 3633 6830 or email [email protected] for a chat.