Comment by specialist

I've used the group coordination technology of democracy in the workplace. It was both awesome and burdensome.

Awesome, because social cognition and personal empowerment are force multipliers.

Burdensome, because change is hard, empowerment means accountability, some people would rather complain than contribute.

I'd never advocate leaderless, flatness, whatever pseudo anarchist mumbo-jumbo. Doesn't work. Tyranny of Structurelessness, If We Burn, and all that.

I threaded the needle by creating an org chart comprised of well defined roles. And (most) every team member served in (most) every role, over time. So the person serving in the QA/Test role dutifully executed the QA/Test playbook. And next release they might represent the Engr, TechSupp, etc role.

Otherwise known as cross training, but with better support and culture.

YMMV, obv. Different efforts require different structures. There's a cornucopia of group decision making tools, skills, techs. Use what works best for the task and context at hand.

--

I'm very intrigued by how Oxide Computers is running things. Just from their podcasts, radically open seems like it's working for them.