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

Best Practices - Slack

Hi All - First time posting. 

I'm in a role for selecting / implementing team communication tools for our Holacracy circle. We are migrating into Slack, with the intention of reducing email, getting out of using Skype 'groups' for chat and one on one, and engaging circles more fully. I'm looking for some advice on best practices: 

Do you use private channels for core circle members / roles [only] in specific circles? 

How much transparency is there across the organization in slack? 

Do you have policies for being a member in a slack channel without participating in it? (auditing / listening in) 

Do you use more than one workspace? 

I would be thrilled to hear examples of what works (or doesn't).

Thank you! - Boysen

 

3 Replies
Jenn
07/08/2018

We use one workspace. Everyone is welcome to "listen in" to almost all channels. We have very few private channels.

Also we were hesitant to add another software and it was so worth it. We did intially end up with way too many channels but it has slowly adjusted itself. There was a tension and then people deleted and combined stuff so there wasn't so many. I will say I wish I did more training on functions, using threads, and setting notifications because there was some miscommunication and frustration intially.

Jenn

Colin
07/08/2018

We were in a similar situation, looking to replace Skype with something else, and also chose to move to Slack.

Do you use private channels for core circle members / roles [only] in specific circles?

Most circles have public channels, with very few exceptions for circles that deal with sensitive data.

How much transparency is there across the organization in slack? 

We generally have a lot of transparency within the organization, but I feel that's not necessarily due to slack.
In my eyes one of the best arguments for slack (vs Skype groups) is discoverability - with the channel list you can find whatever group you may be looking for, rather than needing to know that it exists and ask someone to invite you.

Do you have policies for being a member in a slack channel without participating in it? (auditing / listening in) 

No, nothing like that

Do you use more than one workspace?

We only use one workspace, with about 160 people (though with external guests we're at about 600 slack users).

Hannes Gassert
10/12/2018

 My current feeling of how I'd like to see it done goes like this:

Channels that map to roles/circles..

.. should be clearly recognizable as such. For example by a suffix "-role" or "-circle".

.. should have priority over others => make that visible and have it effect in the ordering of the channels. For example by prefixing the channel names with "_".

.. should be private by default. Circles are like cells, they should have a cell membrane that clearly regulates what goes in and what goes out. For that we have roles. If we don't do it, circles become undefined, with people from the outside coming in and "offering advice" and so on.

The private channel thing is not something I would want to have, but over the past years the lack of clarity became really an issue in our organization, I think. Might also be solved by a bot that maps channel membership to role fillers, but then someone would have to write that, or by other means. 

People of course can always create other channels to discuss matter of all sorts, have "guilds" for topics and so on, and those should always be open.

[@mention:449693036223847456] maybe you could share how you guys do it, and say a few things about the Slack integration you're building?