Tactical meetings in Holacracy are a fundamental component of the governance process within this innovative organizational framework. Holacracy, a self-management system that replaces traditional hierarchies with distributed authority and roles, relies on tactical meetings to address day-to-day operational concerns, ensuring that work gets done efficiently and in alignment with the organization’s purpose.
Tactical meetings in Holacracy serve as a regular forum for teams or circles to address operational issues, make decisions, and clarify roles and responsibilities. These meetings are distinct from governance meetings, which focus on defining and updating the organization’s structure and processes. Tactical meetings are essential for maintaining operational efficiency and ensuring that the work of the organization progresses smoothly.
In a tactical meeting, tensions or concerns related to ongoing projects or roles are addressed collaboratively. The primary goal is to resolve operational issues, optimize processes, and ensure that everyone is aligned with the organization’s purpose.
Characteristics of Tactical Meetings
Several key characteristics distinguish tactical meetings in Holacracy:
Operational Focus: Tactical meetings focus on day-to-day operational concerns and are not meant to address broader governance or structural issues.
Regular Frequency: These meetings are held at regular intervals, ensuring that operational issues are addressed promptly.
Structured Format: Tactical meetings follow a structured format, typically guided by a facilitator, to ensure that topics are discussed efficiently.
Role-Based Discussions: Participants in tactical meetings discuss their roles and responsibilities, seeking clarity and alignment.
Action-Oriented: Tactical meetings aim to drive action and make decisions to resolve tensions and improve operational processes.
Advantages of Tactical Meetings in Holacracy
Tactical meetings within Holacracy offer several advantages that contribute to operational efficiency:
1. Rapid Issue Resolution:
Tactical meetings provide a platform for addressing operational issues promptly, ensuring that they do not escalate into more significant problems.
2. Enhanced Clarity:
These meetings foster role clarity and alignment, reducing confusion and misunderstandings regarding responsibilities.
3. Improved Accountability:
Tactical meetings promote accountability by allowing team members to discuss and take ownership of their roles and projects.
4. Real-Time Adjustments:
Teams can make real-time adjustments to workflows, processes, and project plans to adapt to changing circumstances.
5. Enhanced Efficiency:
By providing a structured space to address operational concerns, tactical meetings contribute to the overall efficiency of the organization.
Challenges of Tactical Meetings in Holacracy
While tactical meetings offer numerous benefits, they are not without their challenges:
1. Time-Consuming:
Tactical meetings can be time-consuming, particularly if not well-facilitated or if too many issues are raised.
2. Role Overlaps:
Discussions about roles and responsibilities may reveal overlaps or tensions between roles, requiring resolution.
3. Meeting Fatigue:
Frequent tactical meetings can lead to meeting fatigue if not managed effectively, affecting participant engagement.
4. Skill Requirement:
Effective facilitation is essential for productive tactical meetings, and not all participants may possess the necessary facilitation skills.
5. Balancing Tactical and Strategic:
Striking the right balance between addressing tactical issues and focusing on strategic goals can be challenging.
Real-World Applications
Tactical meetings in Holacracy have practical applications across various industries and organizations:
1. Tech Startups:
Fast-paced tech startups can benefit from tactical meetings to address operational challenges, align teams, and adapt to rapidly changing market conditions.
2. Creative Agencies:
Creative agencies often require quick problem-solving and role clarity, making tactical meetings a valuable tool for maintaining workflow efficiency.
3. Nonprofits:
Nonprofit organizations can use tactical meetings to streamline operations, ensure accountability, and adapt to the evolving needs of their beneficiaries.
4. Healthcare:
Healthcare institutions can leverage tactical meetings to address operational concerns, enhance patient care, and improve the overall efficiency of healthcare delivery.
5. Manufacturing:
In the manufacturing sector, tactical meetings help optimize production processes, resolve production line issues, and ensure that quality standards are met.
Facilitating Effective Tactical Meetings
To ensure that tactical meetings in Holacracy are effective and efficient, organizations must consider the following:
Skilled Facilitators: Designate or train skilled facilitators who can guide the meetings, maintain focus, and manage time effectively.
Clear Agendas: Establish clear agendas for tactical meetings to ensure that discussions stay on topic and align with operational goals.
Time Management: Manage meeting time rigorously to prevent discussions from dragging on and exhausting participants.
Documentation: Keep comprehensive records of tactical meetings, including decisions made, action items, and role clarifications.
Feedback Loop: Create a feedback loop to assess the effectiveness of tactical meetings and make continuous improvements.
Conclusion
Tactical meetings within the Holacracy framework play a vital role in ensuring operational efficiency, role clarity, and issue resolution. While they require structure and facilitation, these meetings contribute to the organization’s overall effectiveness by addressing operational concerns promptly and fostering alignment among team members. As organizations continue to embrace self-management and distributed authority models like Holacracy, tactical meetings will remain a critical tool for maintaining smooth operations and enabling teams to adapt to the ever-changing demands of the modern business landscape.
In a functional organizational structure, groups and teams are organized based on function. Therefore, this organization follows a top-down structure, where most decision flows from top management to bottom. Thus, the bottom of the organization mostly follows the strategy detailed by the top of the organization.
In a flat organizational structure, there is little to no middle management between employees and executives. Therefore it reduces the space between employees and executives to enable an effective communication flow within the organization, thus being faster and leaner.
Project portfolio management (PPM) is a systematic approach to selecting and managing a collection of projects aligned with organizational objectives. That is a business process of managing multiple projects which can be identified, prioritized, and managed within the organization. PPM helps organizations optimize their investments by allocating resources efficiently across all initiatives.
Harvard Business School professor Dr. John Kotter has been a thought-leader on organizational change, and he developed Kotter’s 8-step change model, which helps business managers deal with organizational change. Kotter created the 8-step model to drive organizational transformation.
The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model was created by David Nadler and Michael Tushman at Columbia University. The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model is a diagnostic tool that identifies problem areas within a company. In the context of business, congruence occurs when the goals of different people or interest groups coincide.
McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom for Growth is a strategy tool. Developed by partners at McKinsey and Company, the tool helps businesses understand which opportunities will contribute to expansion, and therefore it helps to prioritize those initiatives.
Mintzberg’s 5Ps of Strategy is a strategy development model that examines five different perspectives (plan, ploy, pattern, position, perspective) to develop a successful business strategy. A sixth perspective has been developed over the years, called Practice, which was created to help businesses execute their strategies.
The COSO framework is a means of designing, implementing, and evaluating control within an organization. The COSO framework’s five components are control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring activities. As a fraud risk management tool, businesses can design, implement, and evaluate internal control procedures.
The TOWS Matrix is an acronym for Threats, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Strengths. The matrix is a variation on the SWOT Analysis, and it seeks to address criticisms of the SWOT Analysis regarding its inability to show relationships between the various categories.
Lewin’s change management model helps businesses manage the uncertainty and resistance associated with change. Kurt Lewin, one of the first academics to focus his research on group dynamics, developed a three-stage model. He proposed that the behavior of individuals happened as a function of group behavior.
OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research laboratory that transitioned into a for-profit organization in 2019. The corporate structure is organized around two entities: OpenAI, Inc., which is a single-member Delaware LLC controlled by OpenAI non-profit, And OpenAI LP, which is a capped, for-profit organization. The OpenAI LP is governed by the board of OpenAI, Inc (the foundation), which acts as a General Partner. At the same time, Limited Partners comprise employees of the LP, some of the board members, and other investors like Reid Hoffman’s charitable foundation, Khosla Ventures, and Microsoft, the leading investor in the LP.
Airbnb follows a holacracy model, or a sort of flat organizational structure, where teams are organized for projects, to move quickly and iterate fast, thus keeping a lean and flexible approach. Airbnb also moved to a hybrid model where employees can work from anywhere and meet on a quarterly basis to plan ahead, and connect to each other.
The Amazon organizational structure is predominantly hierarchical with elements of function-based structure and geographic divisions. While Amazon started as a lean, flat organization in its early years, it transitioned into a hierarchical organization with its jobs and functions clearly defined as it scaled.
The Coca-Cola Company has a somewhat complex matrix organizational structure with geographic divisions, product divisions, business-type units, and functional groups.
Costco has a matrix organizational structure, which can simply be defined as any structure that combines two or more different types. In this case, a predominant functional structure exists with a more secondary divisional structure.
Costco’s geographic divisions reflect its strong presence in the United States combined with its expanding global presence. There are six divisions in the country alone to reflect its standing as the source of most company revenue.
Compared to competitor Walmart, for example, Costco takes more a decentralized approach to management, decision-making, and autonomy. This allows the company’s stores and divisions to more flexibly respond to local market conditions.
Dell has a functional organizational structure with some degree of decentralization. This means functional departments share information, contribute ideas to the success of the organization and have some degree of decision-making power.
eBay was until recently a multi-divisional (M-form) organization with semi-autonomous units grouped according to the services they provided. Today, eBay has a single division called Marketplace, which includes eBay and its international iterations.
Facebook is characterized by a multi-faceted matrix organizational structure. The company utilizes a flat organizational structure in combination with corporate function-based teams and product-based or geographic divisions. The flat organization structure is organized around the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, and the key executives around him. On the other hand, the function-based teams are based on the main corporate functions (like HR, product management, investor relations, and so on).
Goldman Sachs has a hierarchical structure with a clear chain of command and defined career advancement process. The structure is also underpinned by business-type divisions and function-based groups.
Google (Alphabet) has a cross-functional (team-based) organizational structure known as a matrix structure with some degree of flatness. Over the years, as the company scaled and it became a tech giant, its organizational structure is morphing more into a centralized organization.
IBM has an organizational structure characterized by product-based divisions, enabling its strategy to develop innovative and competitive products in multiple markets. IBM is also characterized by function-based segments that support product development and innovation for each product-based division, which include Global Markets, Integrated Supply Chain, Research, Development, and Intellectual Property.
McDonald’s has a divisional organizational structure where each division – based on geographical location – is assigned operational responsibilities and strategic objectives. The main geographical divisions are the US, internationally operated markets, and international developmental licensed markets. And on the other hand, the hierarchical leadership structure is organized around regional and functional divisions.
McKinsey & Company has a decentralized organizational structure with mostly self-managing offices, committees, and employees. There are also functional groups and geographic divisions with proprietary names.
Microsoft has a product-type divisional organizational structure based on functions and engineering groups. As the company scaled over time it also became more hierarchical, however still keeping its hybrid approach between functions, engineering groups, and management.
Nestlé has a geographical divisional structure with operations segmented into five key regions. For many years, Swiss multinational food and drink company Nestlé had a complex and decentralized matrix organizational structure where its numerous brands and subsidiaries were free to operate autonomously.
Nike has a matrix organizational structure incorporating geographic divisions. Nike’s matrix structure is also present at the regional and sub-regional levels. Managerial responsibility is segmented according to business unit (apparel, footwear, and equipment) and function (human resources, finance, marketing, sales, and operations).
Patagonia has a particular organizational structure, where its founder, Chouinard, disposed of the company’s ownership in the hands of two non-profits. The Patagonia Purpose Trust, holding 100% of the voting stocks, is in charge of defining the company’s strategic direction. And the Holdfast Collective, a non-profit, holds 100% of non-voting stocks, aiming to re-invest the brand’s dividends into environmental causes.
Samsung has a product-type divisional organizational structure where products determine how resources and business operations are categorized. The main resources around which Samsung’s corporate structure is organized are consumer electronics, IT, and device solutions. In addition, Samsung leadership functions are organized around a few career levels grades, based on experience (assistant, professional, senior professional, and principal professional).
Sony has a matrix organizational structure primarily based on function-based groups and product/business divisions. The structure also incorporates geographical divisions. In 2021, Sony announced the overhauling of its organizational structure, changing its name from Sony Corporation to Sony Group Corporation to better identify itself as the headquarters of the Sony group of companies skewing the company toward product divisions.
Starbucks follows a matrix organizational structure with a combination of vertical and horizontal structures. It is characterized by multiple, overlapping chains of command and divisions.
Tesla is characterized by a functional organizational structure with aspects of a hierarchical structure. Tesla does employ functional centers that cover all business activities, including finance, sales, marketing, technology, engineering, design, and the offices of the CEO and chairperson. Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas, decide the strategic direction of the company, with international operations given little autonomy.
Toyota has a divisional organizational structure where business operations are centered around the market, product, and geographic groups. Therefore, Toyota organizes its corporate structure around global hierarchies (most strategic decisions come from Japan’s headquarter), product-based divisions (where the organization is broken down, based on each product line), and geographical divisions (according to the geographical areas under management).
Walmart has a hybrid hierarchical-functional organizational structure, otherwise referred to as a matrix structure that combines multiple approaches. On the one hand, Walmart follows a hierarchical structure, where the current CEO Doug McMillon is the only employee without a direct superior, and directives are sent from top-level management. On the other hand, the function-based structure of Walmart is used to categorize employees according to their particular skills and experience.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
