Does do-ocracy sign the end of management ?

Do-ocracy, power to the doers !

A new organizational model is booming. Based on action, it is made of dynamic people, known as “doers”, who are empowered in organizations to lead projects and take on responsibility they might not have been able to otherwise. More organic, this is another kind of hierarchy, where top players are the one who actually implemented several new projects and idea — with their hands and energy.

No more tayloristic distinction between thinkers and doers. “If you want something to be done, do it.” .

Reshaping organizational models to reinvent the future of work.

Crisis of sense, need for more flexibility, hierarchy crisis, need for more autonomy… The Do-ocracy answers those issues, and it seems to already be working in collective entities such as OuiShare.

Inspired by hackerspace and the open-source culture, it applies now to all profiles looking for organizations in which to blossom and achieve fulfillment.

The organization’s role should be to “enable autonomy, free creativity and allow responsibility to restore the craftsmanship logic”, Laeticia Vitaud.

Still, it supposes to have resourceful workers with a new mindset : creative people who will take on responsibility and implement ideas in the reality. Autonomous and motivated hard workers who won’t be afraid to dedicate their energy and will look for the information and skills they need.

The end of hierarchy ?

No, but it is certainly another form of hierarchy. Team member for a project, leader for another, the hierarchy is not fixed and this has positive consequences throughout the company.

“Most of individuals know how to manage themselves. ” Denis Pennel, author and creator of the World Employment Confederation

Those people don’t need managers or PMOs, they are their own manager and are able to build a team and bring it toward the collective objective. Would it still make sense to have manager, that are often far from reality and damage flexibility ?

Legitimacy comes from competencies and social integration more than experience and good degrees.

Do-ocracy, a solution for innovation management?

Innovation is the heart of a lot of companies’ strategy. Why is it so important?

The audit firm PwC questioned 2,000 managers on the subject in October 2013 and they are almost unanimous. 93% of them believe that their growth over the next five years will no longer be made possible by globalisation but by innovation. As a matter of fact, many firms are making innovation the center of their strategy, and management is one of the most important ways to stimulate innovation.

When we talk about new management methods, we immediately think about innovation. Indeed, companies such as Spotify have been received for their new managerial practices which set an example of a liberated enterprise. Thus, this dynamism makes it possible to foster innovation. Are these new ways of working sources of innovation?

Do-ocracy, through its autonomous management and a source of freedom, opens people’s minds and leaves them the responsibility to assign their tasks. It leaves room for ideas and puts the person in action. It is a particularly effective model to facilitate initiative and involvement by the greatest number. Innovation is the result of actions, and it is by these actions that we can test, make mistakes and escape from out of the comfort zone.

Workers are in a perpetual quest for meaningful work, millennials are no longer found in certain types of management. Do-ocracy can give them meaning, because their capabilities are enhanced, they are trusted and they are allowed to take larger responsibilities.

If it might seem idealistic, we can see the McGregor’s Y theory influence.

But to enable do-ocracy and make it more sustainable, a few rules must be respected:

• Autonomy and energy necessary
• Trial and error methodology
• Responsibility and culture of participation
• Stakes are low to provide the right to fail
• Authority is no coercive
• People should go and look for the required information they need (ex of the need for connectors)
• If the work is done poorly, don’t blame it but make it better

However, it does not fit for every profile. Risk of burnout, frustration, unfairness, exclusion and complacency are real.

Assuming different models suit different profile, should we even look for a universal model ? We believe that individuals should be free to choose the organizational model that best suits them at the moment.