No Managers: Why We Removed Bosses at Treehouse

http://ryancarson.com/post/61562761297/no-managers-why-we-removed-bosses-at-treehouse

by mijustin • 13 years ago

25 20 13 years ago

mijustin4• 13 years ago

This is a pretty bold move. Interesting that they felt that management might be the source of cynicism, indifference and politics (I think they might be right). Can't wait to see how this experiment turns out.

I wonder if they'll still have Product Managers?

ryancarson4• 13 years ago

No sir, no Product Managers.

mijustin4• 13 years ago

Wow. Who decides what gets in the product, and what doesn't? Is there no final say? (anyone can deploy anything they want?)

teh_klev• 13 years ago

Were the staff who worked their way up the management tree compensated for the perceived increase in responsibility?

If so, were they required to take salary cuts?

ryancarson4• 13 years ago

I'll explain how decisions on the Product are made. It's a pretty interesting process.

mijustin4• 13 years ago

Here? Or in future posts? ;)

brador• 13 years ago

No managers is nice, but does it scale? Who handles firing?

NonEUCitizen• 13 years ago

Once you've removed managers, there aren't many non-productive people left to fire.

bowietrousers3• 13 years ago

If only this were true. And yes, it's cutely naive and tunnel-visioned to think so. However, I've been in teams where the drag on the ticket was very much a developer. When that happens, you need processes and experienced people in place to fairly manage their performance, help them into contributing more effectively, and if they don't improve, get rid of them.

A gaggle of developers are not going to be able to do this. Hell, 50% don't even have the social skills to say hello to each other in the morning.

ryancarson4• 13 years ago

Gore has 9,000+ employees, does $2B+ in revenue and has no formal management.

EllaMentry• 13 years ago

From the image: "There will be teams organized around business goals....and teams organized around what they do (like teaching, video, developer etc.)"

Sounds an awful lot like an executive group....(read: managers)

mijustin4• 13 years ago

Here's the image: http://media.tumblr.com/82182785894eabe40d94ac3c69f9dc67/tum...

I don't think it's one executive group; it just sounds like all employees are in teams, and that the teams (as a group) work towards specific goals.

dchymko• 13 years ago

Great article Ryan. I had heard about the Valve Employee Handbook but never had taken the time to look at it. I just read the thing from front to back and it's pretty incredible. It seems like a pretty good balance between autonomy and making sure short term tasks align with longer term goals. Its also interesting that they do have some concept of hierarchy on project teams but thats its organic and temporary.

Looking forward to your future posts to see how you guys implement it!

ruppy• 13 years ago

As someone already said, it is a very bold move. Being in a manger role myself, I have often wondered about the value the managers add and my conclusion is it depends on the company. In a large company, managers are there to protect, support and develop their people - not to get in their way. Though, I will also admit that very few managers are actually good at that. If you are a small company with very smart people, with little to no bureaucracy then you can easily get away with no managers. In an environment where the loudest voice gets heard the most, you probably do need 'good' managers.

No Managers: Why We Removed Bosses at Treehouse

Related Stories