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

In what specific situations can we amend the Lead Link role?

I am very curious about specific situations (and examples) where we can amend the Lead Link role. 

Section 2.2.3 is very clear that it is possible to place the Lead Link functions on another role or process.

In my understanding, this is a desired evolution of self-organization. I have always seen the Lead Link role as something temporary. It seems that the Self Organization Maturity Map confirms my theory: 

http://www.holacracy.org/wp-co...olacracyOne-2015.pdf 

Besides that, do you have any concrete examples of a process to replace the LL authority to assign partners to roles? I was thinking about an election process or something similar... 

Thanks!

5 Replies
Bernard Marie Chiquet
07/27/2016

Yep, several of them.

One is the delegation (by a Policy) of establishing strategies to a strategy meeting process in lieu et place of Leal Link authority to do so. We use that one within iGi and some of the clients we've implemented Holacracy with.

Another is delegation of assigning Partners to the Circle's Roles for specific Role(s) to another Role or an process like the Integrative Election Process.

Another one is delegation of "Allocating the Circle's Ressource across its various Projects and/or Roles to another specifically created Role with one of our client - in this case the Lead Link has most of the skills for being a great Lead Link except the capacity of allocating ressources - so during the time required for this person filling the Lead Link Role to learn that new skill, a new adhoc Role has been created through governance.

There are more but these are le most popular examples I have encountered during 40+ implementations. 

Davi Gabriel da Silva
07/27/2016

Thanks for the answer, Bernard. 

About the Integrative Election, is everyone elegible for a Role in the circle? Or do they need to be apointed as core members of the circle before? How do you handle it if you have more than 50 people in the org?

Margaux
07/27/2016

Hi Davi,

 

To add on Bernard Marie's good point and redirect you to the Constitution:

2.2.3 Amending the Lead Link Role

A Circle may not add Accountabilities or other functions to its own Lead Link Role, or modify the Role’s Purpose, or remove the Role entirely.

However, a Circle may remove any Accountabilities, Domains, authorities, or functions of its Lead Link Role, either by placing them on another Role within the Circle, or by defining an alternate means of enacting them. When this occurs, it automatically removes the relevant element or authority from the Lead Link Role, for as long as the delegation remains in place.

 

For your second question regarding elections:

2.5.1 Elections & Eligibility

The Facilitator of each Circle will facilitate regular elections to elect a Core Circle Member of the Circle into each of its Elected Roles, using the process and rules defined in Article III.

All Core Circle Members are eligible for election and each may hold multiple Elected Roles, except for the Lead Link of a Circle, who may not be elected as its Facilitator or Rep Link.

 

Only core circle members can be elected for core roles in a circle.

Lead Link can't be elected Facilitor nor Rep Link.

Bernard Marie Chiquet
07/27/2016
Davi Gabriel da Silva posted:

How do you handle it if you have more than 50 people in the org?

You may need some training/coaching in order to get several Facilatators in order to cover the number of circles you may have in your 50 people org.

Davi Gabriel da Silva posted:

About the Integrative Election, is everyone elegible for a Role in the circle? Or do they need to be apointed as core members of the circle before? 

Remember per Constitution Section 2.3.4 "The Lead Link of a Circle may specially appoint additional persons to serve as Core Circle Members of a Circle, beyond those required by this Constitution, and may further remove these special appointments at any time."

 

Brian Robertson
07/27/2016

Besides that, do you have any concrete examples of a process to replace the LL authority to assign partners to roles?

One example from HolacracyOne is our spending authorization system, which no longer rests on Lead Link.  Another example is our Role Term policy, which normally constrains a Lead Link from removing people from a role without a second assenting opinion from another role.  There are others you can find in our governance as well.

I was thinking about an election process or something similar... 

I'd recommend a lot of caution about that - I think that process has a lot of problems when used for that purpose (for operationally-focused roles), at least in many cases.  Don't have time to explain the reasons here further, but I think I may have already in another thread somewhere...

- Brian