Holacracy Community of Practice Archive, 2015-2019 Community Holacracy Web Site

Reply to Lead Link and agile pull

By Ulrich Topic posted 09/07/2017

Thanks for your answers. I guessed it must be more "flexible"...

With my question I refer to the following text passages in the role definition and if I take them literally it sounds to me "pushy".

Page 37, Accountabilities of the LL:

  • Allocating the Circle’s resources across its various Projects and/or Roles
  • Establishing priorities and Strategies for the Circle
  • Defining metrics for the circle

So the LL allocates the People to Projects ("Henri, you do this Project"), he establishes priorities ("Angela, let this go, that over there is more important") and he defines metrics ("Tom, you haven't met your Revenue targets which I set."). Sounds very familiar to me working in a "standard, traditional" organisation. 

When @AWO says "I think there a whole range of ways of performing the LL role from very open/agile, to very directive/normal boss." it seems to imply that it is possible to run Holacracy in a very traditional, bossy way. And that's what I was wondering about. I hoped that the constiution somehow limits the options of being directive. 

@Brian: Even if the LL can't assign Tasks - with defining a target (purpose and it's metrics) and leaving it open to the Partners how to achieve it - that's tradtional Management by objectives and not self-management in my eyes.


I still hope to got it wrong. :-)