On Do-ocracy and Structureless Groups

This is a cached copy of a blog post from www.farmckon.net/2012/09/there-are-no-structureless-groups/ because I think this is a valuable thing to keep and share. I’m not the author.


There are no structureless groups

In the past, one of the orgs I founded was an attempt structurless-ness. In some ways it worked out fine, but in several ways, internally especially, it was always tripping over itself. I burnt out and left for related reasons, but something about the situation has always rubbed me the wrong way.

Why didn’t structureless work? Being a bit of an anarchist, I was pretty sure when I started it, that the do-ocracy system would be better than something with more command and control. It’ only a few years later when reading this article on structurelessness that I realized how non-sense the conceit was to begin with.

TL;DR: Every human group has a structure, it’s inevitable. Specialization, interests, skills, or just I-get-along-with-her-better builds a structure. You can’t have a structureless group.

Once you start there, it’s not far to think through to the conclusion that claims of structurelessness is just denial that there is one for whatever reason. I think most common is naivety or idealism of a group, but sometimes more sinister behavior is at play. Anyone organizing unconferences, or open source development projects should read the post and probably dig into the origional article for a more detailed reading. For the skimmers, I leave you with the following:

A ‘laissez-faire’ group is about as realistic as a ‘laissez-faire’ society; the idea becomes a smokescreen for the strong or the lucky to establish unquestioned hegemony over others. This hegemony can easily be established because the idea of ‘structurelessness’ does not prevent the formation of informal structures, but only formal ones.”

This entry was posted on 2012.09.13, 19:22 and is filed under HackerspaceProfessional. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, ortrackback from your own site.

2 Comments

  • #1 by Matt Rogish on 2012.09.17 – 16:04

    How does that jive with Valve Software’s fluid structure? I guess it’s not “structureless” but it is, at least, temporary and self-defining:
    http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-27/why-there-are-no-bosses-at-valve


    Matt

  • #2 by FarMcKon on 2012.09.23 – 10:39

    The valve ‘fluid’ structure is structure, just one where participants can choose how and where to invest their time. I think it’s actually a pretty healthy organic way to structure. Build the cultural norm that the developers can invest trust (ie, go work with/for) or divest trust from a group or team, and you create a very natural feedback look of which people are successful at what they do.

    In short it’s the best of both worlds. Structure, with immediate feedback, and high flexibility.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “On Do-ocracy and Structureless Groups

  1. kev says:

    Order/rules must exist for humans; it can come from within or outside of the participants. By my best estimate, about 1 in 10,000 people are capable of participating in an anarchistic society; everyone else must have some form of external structure to function in a healthy fashion. If you are one of the few fully realized people that has a healthy, internalized social system, contact me:
    kevin7314@gmail.com
    as a test, you will know, and agree with the validity of this statement:
    a functional person, in a dysfunctional society, is dysfunctional.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s