The fun thing about the Haier micro enterprise model is that it's basically the logical extension of autonomous teams ... but with a strong "legal bulkhead" around each team, because each team* is a separate company with its own P&L, CEO, etc.
A forcing function for innovation, accountability, limiting risk, etc.
@matthewskelton yes! I really want to work somewhere that tries it out, it feels very right to me, combined with something like dynamic teaming and you have a VERY different form of organisation. I think what frustrates me a bit about the corporate rebels is they don't talk enough about the evolutionary pressures that got haier there. Super appealing but without knowing what problem there were solving for, hard to know when to apply it
@PurpleBooth dynamic teams are fine for projects or "end-date missions" but for long lived stewardship of services, I am doubtful that swirling the responsibility around is effective or wise 🤔
(Dynamic teams being different from Dynamic Reteaming, of course...)
@mutineer@matthewskelton This was really enjoyable, I think I am going to have to keep learing more about Haier, it's really neat in structure.
I particularly liked this quote at the end:
"At the end of the day, an organizational structure “IS” technology and therefore is natural that — especially in such an advanced company — the two (the technology and the organization) are almost impossible to separate."
@PurpleBooth@mutineer the focus on structure still seems limiting to me. It's the dynamics and interactions within a system that provide the behaviours...
@matthewskelton@PurpleBooth Exactly - the dynamics of interactions. Starting with identification, mutual perception and trust of parties. Structure can be brutalist. Folks can get on despite it. Especially with mutual ownership and co-operation.
Add comment