How to ruin bureaucracy in your company

This is not a question — this is adoption. In my previous post for Asana I found some interesting link by Josh Dickson (Founder Syrah) blog when he told about some problem on the big IT-companies. And he also told about bureaucracy. And he is rights — not competitors, not markets, not a low-quality team skills destroyed many companies.

I think, these things come to business from politics, because these guys like to write and copy papers, manage and wait for something all their life.

And do you know why? This is a bad word and another definition than in Wikipedia. Because they don’t have any final goals, contributors, KPI’s. And as we know, they don’t have any responsibility for what they do. This is one thing why you never should reproduce some bureaucracy process in your business.

How to understand, that your business have some troubles? It’s easy: long time to make, develop and approve some tasks (there no any “average” time — be sure, you can feel this); a minimum fresh ideas; of course, low metrics of your KPI’s. There many factors, which can show you that something go wrong.

This is some common (but very helpful) list of any reasons and decisions, what you should do to prevention or destroy bureaucracy in your company.

Reluctance to develop

Do you remember, how did you started your company? I think, you created something new and this new thing was approved by your customers. The main thing — you created something new. You try, you bet and you won! What do you do similar at last time? Think about this and read next.

Old methodology of work

We live in modern life and business habitat and you should thing like a modern man (company). Especially, when we thinking about IT-products. Modern life has a very high speed of development and you should feel this speed and don’t sit on your black leather chair.

Don’t be coward and try to find most effective way to grow your service and team. Even if this is something strange and unusual. And sometime, even if this way is not comfortable for you or team members. Because, nobody knows, what will be a popular tomorrow.

Old methodology of make decisions

How many members should approve one decision in your company? You even don’t know? Ok. How many step should this decision will go before approving? Keep any approve process simple (but thoughtful), because even if you add 2,3 or 5 responsible members for the decision, it will be non-helpful. All, what you will have — awaiting a long time and the eyes decisions of other participants.

Old methodology of make ideas

How do the ideas make in your company? Only from a product managers? Why? Really, I don’t understand — is it only this members, who work in your company? I swear — all your employees have many ideas about your product features. These people work with your product every day and they have the millions of ideas about what you can do better.

Of course, the thing about users and how to collect feedback from theirs. For example, you can use some online polls and… just ask them about any ideas. Special for you:

Yes, just right now — it’s quick, easy and anonymously for everybody.

Dark hierarchy

I like this color. It associates with Darth Vader and his dark power. And this is why — I know many examples, when all decisions and ideas destroyed only because of the some team members afraid to prove their ideas before the parent staff. Use subordination, but don’t make your company in army barracks. Try to find a balance and show your employees, than everybody could be heard. Even from the boss. Who know, may be new Steve Jobs hide between your employees.

Bad communications

Very important things, because communications between members are the main tool for your team work. It grows relationships and collect all “content” which generated by your team. And than your company biggest, the many times you will spend on your communications between members. Find a right way: online boards, messengers, even some social networks.

Hope, it was helpful for you! Have a good day and don’t be a bureaucrat.

Originally published at