
How to set priorities, create budgets and do PM in a no-manager company - joeyespo
http://ryancarson.com/post/61606695537/how-to-set-priorities-create-budgets-and-do-project
======
jedberg
This isn't a no manager company. This is a "few manager" company. They still
have managers -- the cofounders.

Reading through this series it looks like they basically just consolidated all
of the management decisions to themselves. I'd love to know how a truly no
management company functions, if such a thing exists for companies more than 5
or 6 people.

~~~
ctide
You're conflating leadership with management. While leaders will usually end
up managing, and vice versa, these are all too often treated as one and the
same role. Management is more about driving day to day goals and ensuring
everyone is 'productive' and working towards a specific set of objectives set
down by the leadership. In this case, it sounds to me like everyone is more or
less self-managing and leadership is painting broad strokes about where the
company is headed.

~~~
jedberg
My main counter-example is how they do compensation. Everyone does a peer
review, and then the founders sit in a room and decide everyone's salary. That
doesn't feel like self management to me. I think a self-managed way to do
salary is to either say everyone gets the same thing, or everyone in the
company decides and agrees on everyone else's salary. Neither of which seem
very tenable.

------
zdean
Ricardo Semler's book "Maverick!" is a great read to see the long term impact
of this approach on a company, it's culture, and it's success.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardo_Semler](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ricardo_Semler)

~~~
dmix
Also Valve's handbook:
[http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.p...](http://www.valvesoftware.com/company/Valve_Handbook_LowRes.pdf)

------
evadne
I will not be surprised if this implies a transition from leadership by
authority to leadership by democracy. I will also not be surprised if natural
leaders emerge and small factions start to form around them.

~~~
raheemm
True, this system could lead to the above. But it will more likely lead to
leadership by competence. One of the great failings of traditional management
is that so many incompetent folks become managers.

Another benefit of this system is that it allows for the natural evolution of
teams and leaders. A good leader may not always want to lead. A good leader
may want to follow sometimes. A system like this allows for that. And yet, it
also allows for new leaders to mature and grow on their pace, without needing
an official title such as "manager of X".

I'm curious on the kinds of hurdles they'll face. Old managers simply become
new PMs? How will "boring" projects get done?

~~~
evadne
I think they may very well become (the digital equivalent) tragedies of the
comments. I am under the belief that team leads should handle all the dirty
work nobody else wants to do.

------
wehadfun
I believe that with dedicated, focused employees, a democratic management
system could work.

Thanks for experimenting with management styles.

