I was dismayed to get this article in my inbox because I am inferring someone spent a lot of time and was very intentional about it. However, I wonder about the motivations and the judgments at play.
I have visited Zappos twice since last April. And I have been in touch with both Tony and others who are leading the Holacracy effort, and a smaller amount with other individuals within Zappos. I too would be curious to know what specific plan this author put forth, though with the kind of judgments in the article I would have a hard time finding them credible. At Zappos, they have been heads down, working on teal practices and their compensation system, and other aspects of running a business that have always been needed. They work on conflict management, and launching and removing circles, and helping colleagues learn how to own their authority. So the work continues. And I know I don't have the whole picture.
They are still in the difficult place of shifting paradigms and doing the hard work of evolving their organization. I admire them and do think it is brave what they are doing. And I don't think Holacracy is too difficult for the average worker to adopt, though it is a challenge. That is to be expected. This is part of the reason I am almost the anti sales person when organizations want to adopt Holacracy; I want them to go in with their eyes open to the continued journey Ruben is speaking to.
Finally, Holacracy simply wasn't born out of theory and I would guess that authors who think so are trying to articulate something valuable, but I don't think they really get the paradigm shift with this kind of commentary. Not sure if that is the kind of discourse you are looking for Alexey. Let me know.