Working with Holacracy at Presenter (blog part 1)
Source: Blog by Presenter founder Mas Lubbers
Implementation – how did we get started?
At the beginning of 2016, we started implementing Holacracy within Presenter. Initially, based on the book "Getting Teams Done" by Diederick Janse & Marco Bogers, we introduced Holacracy only within the MT. After more than seven months, with the guidance of Koen Veltman of OrganizationBuilders, we rolled out Holacracy for all functions and meetings in our organization.
“Happyand proud of the steps we havetaken”
Roles vs. functions
When you start working with Holacracy, the first thing you notice is that the work is divided into roles rather than positions. "But isn't a role basically the same thing as a position?" That's what we wondered too. At first glance, it may seem like a minor distinction, but there are essential differences.
The first major difference is that we now refine everyone's set of roles and the responsibilities that fall under them on a monthly basis. We used to use a job description in the application procedure and attach it to the employment contract. But this job description remained in the filing cabinet because it was clear what a marketing manager does. And so now it is 100% clear who is responsible for maintaining our site and that keeping track of the blog schedule is a responsibility that goes with it. In our case, the person responsible is no longer the former marketing manager.
Because things are clearly described, and because you check monthly to see if everything is still correct, people also behave in accordance with their responsibilities. A system such as www.Glassfrog.com is essential for us, to keep the description of roles and responsibilities accessible and up to date for everyone. We thought it would work in Excel, but it quickly became a mess. The structure of our organization and roles is public. It is clear what is expected of each role.
The starting point now is that the Leadlink (in old terms: the manager of the department) assigns roles to the circle members (the department). You are allowed to refuse or return a role. This has proven to be a good working method, whereby in most cases you simply discuss who will do what.
Assigning and revoking roles
Another major difference is the dynamic with which roles are assigned to individuals. In some cases, the person who initially took on a role naturally realizes that they do not enjoy the role or that they are unable to perform a responsibility properly. The role is then returned to the Leadlink of the circle. This proves to be a very powerful mechanism. It frees people from performing roles that they are not good at, that they do not enjoy, or that they feel do not provide them with sufficient preconditions. For example, in our case, the role of organizing events was returned because the employee felt that there was too much uncertainty surrounding it. This was difficult for the Leadlink, who had three options for solving the problem:
take on the role yourself;
find someone else within the organization who is willing to do it;
Fulfill all preconditions in such a way that the original employee will still want to do it.
This is challenging for Leadlink, but it is beneficial. After all, isn't this precisely what a manager is intended to do? Provide clarity about expectations and create the conditions within which these can be realized?
Another possibility is, of course, that someone is not fulfilling their role properly or is neglecting it. Within Holacracy, the Leadlink has the option of assigning a role to someone else or taking it on themselves at any time. It is very helpful if this is clear to everyone. That it becomes normal for people to sometimes be assigned extra roles and that sometimes a role is taken back. Of course, it is not pleasant when a role you enjoy is taken away, but it feels very different when you have to give back one of the 10 marketing roles you have. For example, someone else gets the role of "website maintenance," but you still keep the other nine roles. You could also have been dismissed from your position as marketing manager all at once. It is very beneficial for both the individual and the organization when this flexibility arises. I am certain that this has enabled us to retain at least one person in the organization and that, in a number of cases, we have been able to improve the performance of a role.
Roles and HR
We hadn't really thought through the consequences of working in roles beforehand. By this I mean that when people start fulfilling a variety of roles, you no longer have clarity in terms of positions (nice) and the associated salaries (hmm, not everyone likes that). We think we can solve this by using the Baarda model. In the Baarda model, people are classified based on eight levels of functioning: helper, basic worker, all-rounder, specialist, professional, generalist, leader, and strategist. It is fairly easy to determine the right level. Combined with the field of expertise, this quickly results in a salary scale within which a person can be reasonably well plotted in consultation.
Personally, based on these experiences, I would also like to do away with job titles altogether. However, that is not always so easy, because the outside world thinks in terms of job titles and asks for the marketing manager. Or expects an account manager or account director to act as a representative of the company. In due course, I think we will do away with those too, but for now we are very happy and proud of the steps we have taken.