Self-management
Self-management is a management philosophy that emphasizes equality among individuals within organizations, offering an alternative to traditional hierarchical structures. This approach allows employees to make decisions regarding their work without waiting for managerial directives, fostering a sense of ownership and shared responsibility. Self-managed organizations, such as the kibbutzim in Israel and various tech companies, operate with flat structures where titles and seniority are minimized or absent. Historically, self-management gained prominence in the latter half of the twentieth century, notably in Yugoslavia, where workers' councils facilitated employee participation in organizational decision-making.
While self-management can lead to increased job satisfaction and efficiency by empowering employees, it also presents challenges. A lack of clear leadership may result in accountability issues and confusion over roles and responsibilities. Additionally, disparities in knowledge and experience between workers and management can create obstacles to effective collaboration. Modern adaptations of self-management, such as holacracy, aim to balance distributed decision-making with structured oversight, promoting democratic practices within organizational circles. Overall, self-management represents a diverse and evolving strategy in organizational governance, reflecting varying cultural and operational contexts.
On this Page
Self-management
Self-management is a skill and management philosophy based on the idea that all individuals are equal. It is an alternative to the traditional hierarchical model of organizations, in which individuals answer to and are directed by higher levels of management.
Self-management is a system of flattening. It is one in which, in theory, eliminates or minimalizes barriers to progress because workers have the authority to make decisions about what needs to be done and how to do it without waiting for a manager for direction. The self-managed corporate structure is, ideally, flat, with no seniority or titles.
Many groups in Israel functioned as self-management organizations from the last decades of the twentieth century through the twenty-first century. Yugoslavia's self-management system in the latter twentieth century ran until around 1992. In the twenty-first century, many technology industry organizations have established self-management systems.
Background
The philosophy of self-management is based on an equalization of power. It emerged during the twentieth century as a reaction to the Soviet Union's political and social ideas. Under Joseph Stalin, the country focused on rapid industrialization and socialism. Socialism is the theory that systems used in production, distribution, and exchange should be community property. Many countries rejected this idea and also rejected capitalism, a system in which trade and industry are for-profit and privately controlled ventures. They instead sought alternatives.
In the former Yugoslavia, the self-management system developed based on the idea that employees could operate an organization. Workers' councils hired and fired managers and made the organization's decisions. Managers were tasked with finding ways to ensure the decisions were achieved. Although managers were prohibited from becoming members of workers' councils, researchers found many did sit on councils. Some researchers concluded that many workers had been poor farmers and accepted managers on workers' councils because the workers lacked skill and information about manufacturing processes such as technology and marketing.
Workers at some of these self-management organizations had a great deal of power. In addition to being able to sit on the workers' council, they might also be able to refuse to perform a task. Managers could ask workers to do something, but they did not have the authority to order anyone to do a job.
Although the Yugoslav self-management system included both workers and management on workers' councils, the systems were often successful. Workers felt a shared sense of responsibility and ownership of organizations. They also learned from the managers. Many workers became knowledgeable about management and went on to work as managers themselves.
After Yugoslavia broke up in 1992, these benefits remained evident in the region. Many managers in the newly created countries had positive attitudes toward self-management. In one country, Slovenia, a new system based on codetermination, or worker participation in making an organization's decisions, developed.
Overview
The Yugoslav experience demonstrates positive and negative aspects of self-management. Problems emerged when workers' and managers' knowledge and experiences vastly differed. Under this model, workers benefit when the organization is structured so they can gain needed experience.
Some self-management systems have been operating since the late twentieth century. The kibbutzim of Israel are examples of the self-management system. Kibbutzim are communities that live and work together. They share equally in the profits from whatever venture the kibbutz owns and operates, whether it is farming or running factories. Traditionally, all were paid equally based on the size of the family—payment to meet the family's needs—regardless of what work the members performed. All kibbutz members are part of the general assembly, which makes policies and assigns duties to individuals. Duties, which may range from laundry or cooking for the communal kitchen to finance or organizational roles, are usually rotated after a set period of time, such as a year or two.
In the twenty-first century, organizations have looked at self-management systems again. Many gaming companies are flat organizations. Valve Corporation, for example, has no job titles. Workers are free to join any project in which they are interested. An employee who wants to begin a project can do so, but must also secure funding and build a team.
The flat organization system works best for small- or medium-size companies. Many small companies developed this way and have been able to remain flat. As organizations grow larger, they often adapt by developing some hierarchies, although some are able to maintain a degree of flatness within these hierarchies.
One system that incorporates hierarchies as well as flatness is holacracy. Brian Robertson and his Ternary Software introduced this management practice in 2007. It takes its name from holarchy, a term in the 1967 book The Ghost in the Machine by Arthur Koestler. Koestler defined a holarchy as a connection between parts of a larger whole. The holacratic system operates with a set of clear democratic guidelines. The organizational system does not have any bosses. People work on what they do best, and decision-making is distributed within a circle, which is similar to the concept of a department structure. Workers share information freely and gather for regular meetings. The system is generally democratic within circles, and workers are encouraged to contribute their opinions.
Although the holacratic system does not depend on a hierarchy of bosses, it does include a hierarchy of circles. Higher circles communicate purposes and goals to lower circles, and can make any changes to the circles, such as adding or removing members. Circles have specific purposes, which are defined by higher circles. Although a holacracy does not technically have any managers, some workers perform management duties, such as sending status updates and establishing deadlines.
Self-management systems have a number of benefits. Workers tend to be more satisfied when they have some control over their work. Decisions are made by people closely involved with the work. An organization can realize financial benefits, too, by eliminating middle managers. However, the lack of structure can hinder progress. With no person in charge, accountability and dependability can become concerns. Groups often sort out their own hierarchies—for example, workers may view workers with more experience and time served within the company as having greater authority. Groups within a circle may develop cliques that impede communication with others. When workers do not have job titles, or job descriptions, they may be confused as to exactly what is expected of them.
Bibliography
Denning, Steve. "Making Sense of Zappos and Holacracy." Forbes, 15 Jan. 2014, www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2014/01/15/making-sense-of-zappos-and-holacracy/#330c0f903207. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Feloni, Richard. "Here's How the 'Self-Management' System That Zappos Is Using Actually Works." Business Insider, 3 June 2015, www.businessinsider.com/how-zappos-self-management-system-holacracy-works-2015-6. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Meehan, Colette L. "Flat vs. Hierarchical Organizational Structure." Houston Chronicle, smallbusiness.chron.com/flat-vs-hierarchical-organizational-structure-724.html. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Morgan, Jacob. "The 5 Types of Organizational Structures: Part 5, Holacratic Organizations." Forbes, 20 July 2015, www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/07/20/the-5-types-of-organizational-structures-part-5-holacratic-organizations/#21372ef048a2. Accessed 6 Dec. 2017.
Morgan, Jacob. "The 5 Types of Organizational Structure: Part 3, Flat Organizations." Forbes, 13 July 2015, www.forbes.com/sites/jacobmorgan/2015/07/13/the-5-types-of-organizational-structures-part-3-flat-organizations/#6a990c996caa. Accessed 6 Dec. 2017.
Rokita, Iza. “Flat Organizational Structure - How We Evolved and Why.” SoftwareMill, 27 June 2022, softwaremill.com/flat-organizational-structure/. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Seibel, Hans Dieter, and Ukandi G. Damachi. Self-Management in Yugoslavia and the Developing World. MacMillan P, 1982.
Stoyan Mitov. “How Flat Organizational Structure Can Foster Sustainable Company Growth.” Forbes, 24 Oct. 2024, www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2024/10/24/how-flat-organizational-structure-can-foster-sustainable-company-growth/. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Vaara, Eero, et al. “How to Successfully Scale a Flat Organization.” Harvard Business Review, 7 June 2021, hbr.org/2021/06/how-to-successfully-scale-a-flat-organization. Accessed 11 Jan. 2025.
Wilson, Fiona. Organizational Behaviour and Work: A Critical Introduction. Oxford UP, 2010, pp. 349–53.