The idea of not having a boss in the workplace might be outrageous. Someone must manage the team and “navigate the ship in the right direction”. Of course, all of these are very needed. The question is: Should all these tasks be in the hands of one or a few people? Or should all team members participate equally?
Participative management is nothing new. Many big companies have been implementing some features of participative management into their practice. Toyota and Google are both good examples. Still officially named management remains in these companies. The management is clever enough to systematically collect ideas for improvement and give the employees some space to work on their projects during the official working time. These boost the creativity and innovation in the companies.
My husband’s background is in IT and it is always enriching to discuss these topics with him and his friends. The vast majority of them think that management is not needed. It is important to hire the right people, experts who understand what they do. These people are perfectly capable of managing themselves without any modern HR tools like performance discussions, goal setting, Scrum mastering, etc. They would not need long meetings and endless discussions. They would just have the shit done – faster and cheaper. They could only focus on their customers’ needs and search for the best solution among them, experts.
I used to have doubts regarding IT guys’ opinions on this matter, but I realized they were on something when I bumped into Jos de Blok. When you open his web page, there are just 2 statements that get your attention: Make it simple and get rid of the managers.
In a nutshell, Jos transformed the home-based healthcare system in The Netherlands. Health care is provided by smaller autonomous teams, who are perfectly capable to organise themselves. His company Buurtzorg does not have any managers, call centers, or planners. They do not have any goals, bonuses, or fancy offices. Every team consists of 12 people and they work completely independently as a team with their schedule, budget for training, and 1 coach who works with the app. 50 teams. They use an intranet where all colleagues can share their experiences, knowledge, and ideas. The company as such only has a finance department and cares for the financial aspect of the business model.
Jos’ statements are worth quoting (Bregman, 2019):
“There is a huge gap between the people at the top and those doing the real work – in healthcare, in education, wherever… Managers stick together. They go to all sorts of training and conferences where they reassure each other that they are doing everything right.”
“My experience is that managers actually have very few ideas. They got their jobs because they fit into the system and follow the orders… But the people who do the real work are having all sorts of great ideas… which no one listens to because the managers have retreated to their sanctuary, where they create plans, which they then present to all the bee-workers.”
“It is easy to make things difficult, but it is difficult to make them easy. The experiences show, that managers prefer complicated things because it makes their work look more interesting. They can say then: You see, you need me to deal with all the complexity.”
This guy has won several times the prize for the employer of the year and best marketing firm without having an actual marketing department. The employees are happy with the workplace and clients with the provided health care.
With such an approach not only everything is faster and cheaper, but additionally also more equal. People share responsibility and understand the necessity of their contribution. They do not rely on the managers’ decisions made behind closed doors (usually also far away from the everyday reality at the workplace).
I also know other workplaces with no hierarchy. All the employees are equals. They decide for example the salary and everyone earns the same amount. They make all the important decisions together as a team. Even when they hire a new employee, all the team takes part in the interview process. If they create any profit from their activities, they decide to which non-governmental organization will the money be donated. Otherwise, everyone is free to organize their work however they want.
These types of workplaces also shake with capitalism – mostly when it comes to maintaining sustainable development and bringing equity into society. Capitalism distributes the growing wealth unfairly. There are for example income disparities among various groups of population. For example USA: in 2018 low-income families had an annual income of 28.700 USD in comparison with middle-class families with 86.600 USD and upper-class families with 207.400 USD.
Unequal distribution of financial resources is seen also in companies, where executives earn 320 times more than “ordinary” employees. From 1978 to 2019 the compensation for typical workers increased by 14%, while for executives by 1167%. Such trends can be followed also in other areas, including the non-governmental sector, even though the gap between salaries is not so huge.
What is the end of this story? There is no. I wanted to make it visible, that organizations and teams can be managed differently. By themselves. We have enough proof and good practice examples, but we lack a different mindset. Be brave and challenge the existing structures. As Jos de Blok concludes: “Managers would be surprised, that the work is being done without them. Often even better.” (Bregman, 2019)
