Honestly, it sounds very similar to stuff we’re already doing. Though I don’t think anyone ever sat down and said ‘let’s make this a holacracy.’
“Some have described the authority paradigm in Holacracy as completely opposite to the one of the traditional management hierarchy; instead of needing permission to act or innovate, Holacracy gives blanket authority to take any action needed to perform the work of the roles, unless it is restricted via policies in governance or it involves spending some assets of the organization (money, intellectual property, etc.)”
We do this, at least, we try to. I wrote a post about it ages ago.
“Holacracy specifies a tactical meeting process that every circle goes through usually on a weekly basis. This process includes different phases to report on relevant data, share updates on projects, and open discussions where any circle member can add to the agenda.”
We do this at GovAlpha, I’m fairly sure that other CU’s have similar meetings. The whole open-agenda thing is practiced pretty widely as well (again, at least at meetings in which I’m present.)
" Holacracy structures the various roles in an organization in a system of self-organizing (but not self-directed) circles. Circles are organized hierarchically, and each circle is assigned a clear purpose and accountabilities by its broader circle. However, each circle has the authority to self-organize internally to best achieve its goals. Circles conduct their own governance meetings, assign members to fill roles, and take responsibility for carrying out work within their domain of authority. Circles are connected by two roles known as “lead link” and “rep link”, which sit in the meetings of both their circle and the broader circle to ensure alignment with the broader organization’s mission and strategy."
So this is the part that we’re half doing. I would say that we have circles, but not a hierarchy of circles (at least not explicitly, at least not yet). One could potentially describe our circle hierarchy as:
Multiple Core Unit Circles → Mandated Actors Circle → Governance / Community in General.
At the least, the mandated actors circle is starting to act a bit like a higher-tier circle over the core units.
So yeah, pretty interesting parallel to draw. Honestly adopting this model more intentionally might be to our benefit, given that we have some weaknesses in areas that this may solve.
On the other hand, there is already a fair amount of administrative overhead just with the requirements for governance and transparency - so maybe we don’t want to add additional administrative overhead that this sort of structure would bring.