I have picked enough on Holacracy in the last few days but I want to ask one further question. What research did the founders do to arrive at this marvellous new management theory?
- Did they subject it to a rigorous analysis by their peers?
- Did they test out assumptions in small scale before testing it on a whole company?
- Did they compare results between companies or before and after implementation?
OK, that’s more than one question but really, why are so many management theories based on untested ideas? And why are so many people willing to listen to so much untested bumpf and even more, why are they willing to pay so much money to inexperienced consultants who sling this stuff around like they are gods of strategy?
Like many others I have fallen prey to many a new idea and then been disappointed by the results. I don’t mean to rant but you might stop for a second and ask yourself; why are you doing what you do?
- How do you know it’s the best way to get results?
- How will it affect those with whom you work?
- How can it be improved?
- How will you know if you are getting it right?
And when I start spouting off on some new theory, ask me those same questions. I have a friend who shall remain nameless (Chris Norton) who has asked me those questions for close to 40 years. It is an endearing quality of his and I’m thankful often that many years ago he asked me a question like that. His question pops into my mind on a regular basis.
How can you prove that?