At the heart of traditional management lies hierarchy. At the heart of self-management lies self-correction. This is a fundamental concept we need to wrap our heads around. If you don't understand how self-correcting systems work, you don't understand self-management.In this episode, I talk about the key ingredients for systems to be able to self-correct.

This is another tragic misunderstanding I see happening again and again. We so much resent the old, bureaucratic, life-sapping, top-down systems of control that we come to see control as a bad thing.Here is the predictable thing that then happens... people get rid of all the control mechanisms and say "from now on, we just operate on trust". And then things don't quite go as expected! Wait... what does that mean? Were we wrong to trust? Trust is absolutely essential, but not sufficient. We need to reframe the conversation. Control is not a bad thing. A system wants to be in control to be healthy! But not through the old top-down control mechanisms. But then... how?The answer, in one two words: self-correction! There is no self-management without self-correcting mechanisms that replace the old top-down control mechanisms

A clear sign that an organization's leadership hasn't yet fully embraced self-management is when it uses terms like "empowerment" and "servant leadership." In self-managing organizations, leaders don't need to "empower" their subordinates, thank you very much! Everyone has access is fully vested with power by the very design of the organization.And while in traditional workplaces, "servant leadership" is a wonderful thing, it feels awkwardly paternalistic in a self-managing organization.

I don't like the words "flat" or "horizontal" organizations. And I often hear people say "In self-management, everyone is equal". I think this is an important topic that deserves that we bring to it the kind of nuanced thinking that paradox allows. Here is a beautiful paradox: In self-management, everyone is intrinsically of equal human value, and yet we celebrate and value differences in roles and contributions! Another way of saying this: we get rid of dominator hierarchies, but welcome and celebrate natural hierarchies. Here is yet another way to say it: we don't want everyone to have the same power, but everyone to be fully powerful.

In the old model, all major decisions and initiatives came from the top. That must mean then in the new model, the top must hold back and let thing happen bottom up, right? I've had conversations with top leaders of several organizations who started doing this. They held back. Stopped making decisions, stopped leading. The result wasn't what they were hoping for. The organization seemed confused and lifeless. The problem with this way of looking at things is that we still reason in terms of "top" and "bottom". That's not self-management! I believe that when we need to start reasoning in terms of "specific" and "broad" roles. And then a whole new perspective opens up, where everyone can be fully powerful. Including the former "top" leaders.

Oh my, almost everyone falls for this one to some degree! Self-management is not the absence of structures, processes and rules. This is a pitfall that many organizations pay the price for, until they manage to correct it. When you deconstruct the old system, but don't build up new systems, you end up with a "blob", a situation where everyone is confused, no one quite knows what they can do and can't do, results often start to slide... Self-Management relies on structures, processes and rules just as much as traditional organizations. It's just that they ensure power-with rather than power-over. That they exist only when they are useful. And that everyone can change them, which makes them very fluid, organic, ever changing...

Almost everyone who is new to self-management has a sense that this is something, well... new, and therefore a quite mysterious, untested, and frankly risky.The truth is that some organizations have been self-managing for decades, withstanding severe recessions.It's still un uncommon practice, but not a risky one. And not a mysterious one. There are enough organizations out there that are doing self-managing really successfully for us to understand it's main practices really well.Just avoid falling for some of the common misunderstandings of what self-management is, and you'll be fine! (That's why there are 5 more episodes in the this mini-series about "Misconception about self-management". You're welcome :-))

A self-managed organization is so fundamentally different from a hierarchical organization that as soon as you talk about self-management, most people will have images come up that are very different from you mean.Boy, there are so many misconceptions around self-management! And for that reason, many organizations head off in a wrong direction at first. There is something you can do to avoid this: first, make sure you don't fall for any of the misconceptions.Then talk about what self-management is and is not over and over again. Consider this a major new role you'll have to play for a while: relentlessly address the misunderstandings around self-management.

I often get asked the question: for self-management to work, does everybody have to be "Teal"? The simple answer: no!Not everyone in your organization views the world through "Teal" lenses, but almost everyone can operate in a self-managing system. It helps if you know how to talk about self-management from all stages, and make it work for all stages.

Organizations where leaders started talking about self-management as a goal in itself, without sharing a deeper "why", still have scar tissue to show for it. Self-management is a concept, and few people get excited for their work place to embrace a concept. In this episode, I will invite you to clarify what could be the most powerful invitation you could make.Hints: link it to the deeper purpose of the organization, and to fundamental assumptions you hold about people and work.