Coordination mechanisms with counter-intuitive scaling properties are one of the banes of organizational design.
-
-
Then there are ideological ones: Markets require quite a bit of scale before they work better than a simple gift economy.
-
People with economics backgrounds or libertarian sympathies will tend to try and use market mechanisms at scales or for purposes that don't make sense.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I hope these are good examples!
-
These are great examples! So true. Organizations are complex. I see flexible and adaptable responses being more effective than blindly following models and theories. The right moves tend to be painful and not easy, which makes it even harder.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
A very important one that almost all administration fails: Feedback to bureaucracy can only come through nonbureaucratic means. This means the illusion of scale and effectiveness can creep in when you set up a such a system without feedback outside it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
At the most basic level there is an overestimation of how far genuine consensus can go. It is hard with two or three people, a team of 20 will never have a true consensus.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is a very good question. The answer varies on the savvy and level of the organizer.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The larger group can achieve seeming consensus with either sound or unsound deferral between the members.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.