As a practitioner of both Holacracy & NVC, I was struck by how complementary they are to each other.
@denniswittrock @ranjithajeurkar @imarifv @shammi_nanda @sallymccutchion @morganleggeYUL @EnergizedOrg @holacracyone @h1brian @chrcowan
For NVC folks, Holacracy will provide a self-management practice to build a purpose-driven org.
There's a sense of shared principles between the two, that make them fit well.
Holacracy: Tactical meetings are structured to process each agenda item by getting clear on the need and then making a request.
NVC: There’s an emphasis on creating a connection by expressing the need before moving into action by making a request.
Holacracy: In a governance meeting the tension and objection are sacred, while the Proposal can be held lightly. The proposal is just one strategy to meet the needs. There's space to get creative with strategies.
Holacracy is a different way of organizing power than the top-down management hierarchy system. Like a constitutional democracy, people don't hold power. Power is with the constitution, which distributes it to roles.
Holacracy: Doesn’t rely on consensus building to bring about change, instead uses the governance process to create change & alignment.
Holacracy: There are no demands or deadlines. Instead, the constitution gives you the right to expect and the right to prioritize.
Holacracy: By following the process, there’s very little space to play the role of the victim. And the process holds up a mirror to any attempt to "save” others or solve problems for them.
Holacracy: When proposing a change, it’s not done by seeking everyone’s approval, but by using the process to meet your role's needs in order to express the purpose of the organization.