![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
andrewduckerA bunch of interesting links I came across in this discussion of companies with a flat structure. Including two about how Valve's "no structure" basically means that control lies in the hands of people who don't have to take responsibility - because technically they have none. here and here.
A nice reminder that when there's no formal structure, you end up with a structure anyway - but one that's a complete mess - the tyranny of structurelessness.
And a lovely quote:
I think that when I first enountered the idea of ad-hoc structure in companies I thought it sounded awesome and freeing. Nowadays I more see it as a way of avoiding responsibility for making sure the company runs well, and avoiding power ending up in the hands of the loudest.
A nice reminder that when there's no formal structure, you end up with a structure anyway - but one that's a complete mess - the tyranny of structurelessness.
And a lovely quote:
Any sufficiently complicated company w/o management contains an ad hoc, informally-specified, bug-ridden, slow implementation of managementfrom here.
I think that when I first enountered the idea of ad-hoc structure in companies I thought it sounded awesome and freeing. Nowadays I more see it as a way of avoiding responsibility for making sure the company runs well, and avoiding power ending up in the hands of the loudest.
