Skip to main content

Daniel Tenner Open Cultures:

Summary Reaction:​

  • Holocracy. This is awesome - by far the best in my view - self organization, transparency, match skillsets with workstreams. We are doing a pretty good job on that so far at TF
  • GitHub: Also good. Though GOGS (our GitHub equivalent) is not as easy to work with as google docs - and will take longer as people need to learn the tools (internally and externally...)
  • Transparency: Folks are embracing transparency well I think
  • Transparent compensation. Not so great. Don't see the benefits (neither does Daniel Tenner, btw...)

Open vs Closed Culture​

Do we Agree?: Yes - broadly. Though Mr. Tenner needs to refine his views on transparent pay etc (he wants it to work - but doesn't seem to believe it works)

Are we on track with a lot of this:

  • Good: Transparency, Flat-ish hierarchy, working via groups of stakeholders, focusing on value drivers not just profits
  • Also good: Trust is pretty good
  • Less Good: We need to be more transparent with the rest of GIG (communication strategy for TFF, IYO, GIG.Tech).
  • Less Good: Also we need to tell people where they stand in terms of company and compensation package...

You can’t hide from yourself​

Do we Agree?: Founders of course want control - it's their baby. This is natural and ok

Are we on track:

  • Good: Company 3.0 communication channels can make more clear values and goals
  • Good: folks are liking and adapting well to the new workstyle (w occasional glitches admittedly)
  • Less good: there are times when convenience trumps principle
  • Less good: we maybe need to be better prepared to live with the decisions we take (they are usually the right decisions at the time...)

There are no B Players​

Do we Agree?: On this one I think Daniel Tenner spot on. We are dealing with very talented people. We need to recognise talents and adapt the team accordingly...

Are we on track:

  • Good: We are doing this well in most cases - Andreas, Nickolay, Bram, Hutton, Weynand, etc
  • Not good: We need to be careful about rating people based on one inflexible scorecard. People have different talents and add value in different areas (some people can code, some have ideas, some are leaders, some are executors, some have relationships, some can sell, etc...)

The Advice Process​

Do we Agree?: Think advice process great for some things (design, strategy, execution, etc) Daniel Tenner points out it is terrible for other things (compensation for instance)

Are we on track:

  • Good: we already use advice process and collaborate on everything
  • Good: We ask advice from stakeholders on big decisions, steps, etc
  • Less Good: we need to trust the process a bit more - sometimes we don’t get to timely decision or we second guess our decision after the fact - we should fix those issues
  • Less good: we have waaaaaaaaaaay too many telegram groups

Fake Transparency​

Do we Agree?: This is actually a rubbish blog - because D Teller focuses too much on “transparent compensation" which he obviously wants to believe in (but clearly does not...) The right thing to focus on would be: giving everyone the whole picture

Are we on track:

  • Good: we are definitely becoming more transparent (daily)
  • Less good: People don’t have the full picture (for instance IYO was a surprise to some people)
  • Also less good: it is clear some GIG folks want to better understand why we are doing w IYO and TFF

Values show up at the extremities​

Do we Agree?: Sure. Better quote would have been “everyone loves principles - until they start costing money"

Are we on track:

  • Good: we are pretty value-focussed - most of the time we are trying to do the right thing. Can’t think of many examples where we try to take advantage
  • Less Good: sometimes we are maybe a little too smart for our own good - complexity sometimes erodes principles / values

How to build a transparent company...Buffer way​

Do we Agree?: This is not a great blog. Again, Daniel Tenner focuses too much on transparent salaries (which he clearly does not believe in...)

Radical transparency​

Do we Agree?: This blog is pretty rubbish and doesn't say much Radical Candor is a good idea though - and we believe in it - but this blog does not do it justice

Introducing Open Salaries​

Do we Agree?: Not really - I think this would be a nightmare for any start up Less Good: On the topic of salaries - we need to give people clarity re their salary and tokens / shares ASAP

Developing a Good Culture​

Do we Agree?: Yes broadly

Are we on track:

  • Good. We have good people at GIG and ThreeFold - no douchebags
  • Less Good: we maybe need to be a bit more tolerant of people from other cultures (eg EMC) - not everything corporates do is bad

GitHub super lean management strategy​

Do we Agree?: Yes. This is pretty cool

Are we on track:

  • Good. We are getting there - folks are adopting the new workstyle and liking it (issues, resolution, version control, one source for everything)
  • Less Good: For less technical tasks - this is much harder (a good example is subjective situations such as investments, franchises, feature definitions, etc)
  • Less Good: also a lot of our tools are not really embraced outside TF and GIG (Google docs, GitHub, etc are difficult for a lot of people...)

Holacracy​

Do we Agree?: Totally - this is exactly how Company 3.0 should operate. We should frequently revisit our strategy/values/beliefs to make sure we are on track. We should let our QBs self-organise. We should collaborate real time. Doing is better than perfect...

Are we on track:

  • Good. We are mostly good on this front
  • Less Good: sometimes the groups are too big (eg when token kicked off w 50 people going every direction)

Responsive.org​

Do we Agree?: Totally - also a great article - same as Holacracy above. This article should probably focus more on self organising though in my view

Are we on track:

  • Good. We are mostly good on this front

Open Salaries​

Do we Agree?: Not really. And neither does Daniel Tenner so I don't see why he spends so much time on the topic...

Are we on track:

  • Good. Our salary policy is at least being thought through so compensation is broadly aligned
  • Less good. We need to communicate comp asap

Culture must be grown step by step​

Do we Agree?: Don't know

Are we on track:

  • Good. Think people buy into the culture - they like the collaboration - like the transparency - like the values
  • Less good. Some things will take time - we are just two weeks into using GitHub for instance....

Evolving Purpose - Grant Tree​

Do we Agree?: I feel pretty strongly that “Doing is way better than Perfect" - this by definition means you must change the hypothesis sometimes - which I think is v healthy This blog is terrible though - and focused on totally the wrong purposes - make money, make more money, get scale, think about values/strategy/etc...

Are we on track:

  • Good. We are pretty good about Doing is better than perfect
  • Less Good: we probably second guess our decisions too much

Zappos Holacracy​

Do we Agree?: Not really. This memo sounds v fake. In my view this is code for downsizing managers - they are just trying to downsize and fire a bunch of people but call it Holacracy

First lets fire the Managers (Morningstar)​

Do we Agree?: Not really. Holacracy article above is better. Morningstar also appears a bit fake...and this was written 2011 when everyone was firing everyone....

Non-violent communication​

Do we Agree?: Maybe - this is just body language

Are we on track:

  • Good: we don't have a lot of aggressive, shouty douchebags - so we are lucky
  • Less good: sometimes we could be more positive

Examples of companies​

Do we Agree?: So so - he appears to be really reaching here.

  • I would have focused on real “culture" companies like GitHub
  • Also (dare we say it) - probably Google - they allow a lot of decentralized autonomous self governance - and are pretty transparent (at least internally...)
  • Whole Foods also is interesting with the self governing units at store level (though obviously hierarchical...)
  • The gaming and content companies (Stripe, Valve, Medium) are in the who cares category...
  • Zappos is a terrible example - as they appear to be fake / using Holocracy as excuse for downsizing