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

Tricky Tension: can't capture tactical outputs for role if not engaged before meeting

Attended a tactical today, and raised a tension: "As Prospect Deployment, engaging Role A & Role B - would be helpful to know when the next email blasts are going out." Role A was present, and told me probably in a week for her blasts. Role B was not present, so asked the Secretary to capture a next-action for Role B: "Update Prospect Deployment regarding next prospect blast date".

After the meeting, Role B expressed frustration: "It feels like under the guise of bringing 'visibility' you end up insinuating that people aren’t fulfilling their roles. I think it makes it feel weirdly hostile if things like that surface for the very first time in the context of a public meeting."

I clarified that's not where I was coming from, and let her know that had the thought occurred to me before the meeting I would've engaged her directly. This did not satisfy her tension though. I'm also filling the role Social Technologist, so I want to make sure she has a path to process this. I suggested she could propose something in governance: "no next action or project can be captured for a role unless they’ve been engaged before the meeting, or are present during the meeting”.

Shortly after I realized I'd likely object, but didn't mention it knowing that the IDM process would sort that out and because I didn't want to discourage her from using the process (she's expressed that's she's uncomfortable with objections). It also occurs to me it might not be a valid proposal (is this a tension from a "soul" or "role"?) and might not be valid governance (conflicts with 4.1.2b).

Obviously coaching is the most natural solve ("this doesn't imply any hostility"), but it would be preferable for a number of reasons to find a way to process this. I also suspect there might be something to come of it that would help move us forward.

Any suggestions would be hugely appreciated.

2 Replies
Andrea Faré
09/14/2016

HI Fred,

my two cents:

Article 4.2.4 indicates what should happen when a role does not show up in tactical, and that's part of a shared ruleset that really makes this sentence sound weird > "It feels like under the guise of bringing 'visibility' you end up insinuating that people aren’t fulfilling their roles. I think it makes it feel weirdly hostile if things like that surface for the very first time in the context of a public meeting."

Article 4.1.2(b) which is mentioned by 4.2.4 still gives role B a chance to refuse to take on the action by explaining the reason why she shouldn't, she could always then come up with a tension in governance, I wonder if she would really be able to attach such a tension to a specific role with a valid example.

the kind of reasoning she's bringing to the table: (not being at ease with objections/considering tactical as "public meeetings where your reputation is at stake) really screams for  some  coaching in my opinion.

this proposal: "no next action or project can be captured for a role unless they’ve been engaged before the meeting, or are present during the meeting” does not sound valid to me, because it conflicts with aforementioned article, by limiting what a tactical meeting could accomplish.

And that without even looking at the tension behind it (assuming it would be the one she informally expressed  "insinuating that people aren’t fulfilling their roles" which is clearly a personal tension).

I'm curious to find out what others think about this.

 

 

 

 

Margaux
09/16/2016

Hi Fred,

 

Agree with Andrea and to add to it, instead of capturing the following action: “Role B: "Update Prospect Deployment regarding next prospect blast date".”, I would rather 1- capture a project for the next email blast to have visibility on it and 2- capture an action “Role B: Give a projection to Prospect Deployment about the project “Next Email Blast sent””.

The coaching you can give is in the constitution, duties of a circle member section 4.1.1:

4.1.1 Duty of Transparency

You have a duty to provide transparency when requested by your fellow Circle Members, in any of the following areas:

  • (c) Projections: You must provide a projection of the date you expect to complete any Project or Next-Action tracked for any of your Roles in the Circle. A rough estimate is sufficient, considering your current context and priorities, but without detailed analysis or planning. This projection is not a binding commitment in any way, and unless Governance says otherwise, you have no duty to track the projection, manage your work to achieve it, or follow-up with the recipient if something changes.