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

Interaction between circles


We are engaged in retail sales of electronics. Recently, we decided to move to a holacracy and we had some difficulties. I ask for your advice. Our company includes the following units:
- Sales department (within this department there are departments for TV sales, sales of mobile phones, etc.);
- Marketing
- IT department (software development for internal needs)
- Purchasing department
- Accounting
- Human Resources Department
- Logistics department.

Suppose that after the transformation of the holacracy, we will have circles of "Sales", "Marketing", "IT", etc.

Is there a formalized mechanism of interaction between these circles?

For example, the circle "Sales TV" to stimulate sales wants to launch a marketing campaign. Such a need can occur regularly, for example, every week. In addition, the circle "Sales TV" may have other regular tasks related to marketing, for example, the launch of contextual advertising. How in this case should the interaction be organized between the "Sales TV" circle and the "Marketing" circle? It is necessary that this interaction be quick and effective, so that there is a qualitative feedback. 

Now we have agile teams, which consist of employees from different departments.

The following thoughts arise:

1. Use cross-links. But in the book "Holacracy" Brian Robertson warns against excessive use of cross-links and advises to use them only in exceptional cases. The cross-link represents the interests of one circle in another (target) circle. And here, on the contrary, the tasks come from the circle of "Sale", which is the target circle. Perhaps I misunderstood the role of the cross-link.
2. Include the role of "Launching marketing actions" in the "Sales TV". But this option also seems to me wrong. This role requires special knowledges and the lead-link of the "Sales TV" circle will not be able to teach it, will not be able to replace this role if a person falls ill or resigns (as required by the constitution).

3. Leave the circles as is. But then how to achieve effective interaction between different circles? We think that if people are in different circles, they will have bad communication. I think that we need some mechanism of interaction between them. 

There is an idea to leave circles as is and separately create agile teams that will consist of participants in different circles. But then the number of meetings will increase and they will spend a lot of time (tactical meetings and governance with their circle, standups and retrospectives with the Agile team). 

I ask for your advice. Thank you. Sorry for my english : (


No Replies