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

Valid Objections?

I want to be clearer about what might be a valid objection in terms of things that degrade clarity or work against the principles of Holacracy, but for which there is not necessarily a concrete example of causing harm.

Example A: There was a proposal to add an accountability using the verb "assuring", a word which doesn't describe a clear action and is associated with managing others rather than doing the work oneself. Is it valid to object to this? On what grounds specifically?

Example B: There was a proposal with a circular reference and a confusing sentence structure: "Referring - after agreement with Investment Lead on coherence with Investment Strategy, naming party and concrete planned approach - prospects for a Bridge Loan investment." I take this to mean that the accountability requires first getting approval before they can even make a referral, which seems impossible because one would need to refer, even in the process of asking permission. Is confusing sentence structure a valid objection because it degrades clarity? And secondly, even if the sentence were clear, is it valid to object because the delegation process is circular? I think I'm answering my own question! 

Example C: There was a proposal to create a Policy regarding how certain non-constitutionally-required meetings are run. There was no one accountable at that time for running those meetings. The proposal was intended to be a process that would be run regularly, so it was not a project or a next action, or a one-off operational decision. However the proposal dictated a certain process from someone with very little experience with meeting processes, without there being any consultation beforehand, so it was very uncomfortable for the group. I understand that there are much better ways to resolve the tension that was expressed, (we have since created an accountability for it) but at the time we couldn't think of a valid objection to stop this policy from being adopted. Is it best to just adopt it, do it, and then make changes based on tensions that arise? Or is there a faster way? 

Really appreciate your help on these nitty-gritties. 


No Replies