Like many tech companies, Valve Corp., a videogame maker in Bellevue,
Wash., boasts high-end espresso, free massages and laundry service at
its offices.
One thing it doesn't have: bosses.
Valve, whose website says the company has been "boss free" since its
founding in 1996, also has no managers or assigned projects. Instead,
its 300 employees recruit colleagues to work on projects they think are
worthwhile. The company prizes mobility so much that workers' desks are
mounted on wheels, allowing them to scoot around to form work areas as
they choose.
Welcome to the bossless company, where the hierarchy is flat, pay is
often determined by peers, and the workday is directed by employees
themselves.
So, how does anyone get things done?
"It absolutely is less-efficient upfront," says Terri Kelly, chief
executive of W.L. Gore, the Newark, Del., maker of Gore-Tex and other
materials. Her title is one of the few at the company.
"[But] once you have the organization behind it…the buy-in and the execution happen quickly," she adds.
Companies have been flattening out their management hierarchies in
recent years, eliminating layers of middle management that can create
bottlenecks and slow productivity. The handful that have taken the idea a
step further, dispensing with most bosses entirely, say that the setup
helps motivate employees and makes them more flexible, even if it means
that some tasks, such as decision-making and hiring, can take a while.
At Valve, there are no promotions, only new projects. To help decide
pay, employees rank their peers—but not themselves—voting on who they
think creates the most value. The company declined to provide
information about how much salaries vary.
Any employee can participate in hiring decisions, which are usually
made by teams. Firings, while relatively rare, work the same way: teams
decide together if someone isn't working out.
As for projects, someone typically emerges as the de facto manager,
says Greg Coomer, a 16-year veteran of Valve who works on product
design. When no one takes the lead, he adds, it's usually a sign that
the project isn't worth doing.
When colleagues disagree on whether to keep or scrap products, the
marketplace decides, Mr. Coomer says. "When we honestly can't come to an
agreement—that's really very rare—we ship and find out who was right,"
he says.
Hiring highly motivated workers is vital to making a boss-free
system work. And it isn't for everyone. Most employees take anywhere
from six months to a year to adapt, though some leave for more
traditional settings, Mr. Coomer says.
The system has its downsides. Without traditional managers, it can be
harder to catch poor performers. Even the employee handbook, a packet
that explains Valve's philosophy and processes, notes that bad hiring
decisions "can sometimes go unchecked for too long."
Recent research on the value of flat organizations has been mixed. One
study, by researchers at the University of Iowa and Texas A&M
University, found that teams of factory workers who supervised
themselves tended to outperform workers in more traditional hierarchies,
so long as team members got along well. "The teams take over most of
the management function themselves," says co-author Stephen Courtright.
"They collectively perform the role of a good manager."
Other studies, however, have found that hierarchies can sometimes boost
group effectiveness, and that having a clearly defined role can help
people work more efficiently.
For years General Electric Co. has run some aviation-manufacturing
facilities with no foremen or shop-floor bosses. The industrial giant
says it uses the system to boost productivity in low-volume factories
with a relatively small number of employees, each of whom can do several
tasks.
One leader, the plant manager, sets production goals and helps resolve
problems but doesn't dictate daily workflow. Teams, whose members
volunteer to take on various duties, meet before and after each shift to
discuss the work to be done and address problems to be solved.
The first of these self-managed teams began nearly two decades ago in a
Durham, N.C., plant, but in the past five years they have spread to
other GE facilities. The team structure is being expanded to all of GE
Aviation's 83 supply-chain sites, which employ 26,000.
Moving up can be hard when there is no corporate ladder. But many
employees feel it is easier to grow in their careers without layers of
management, says Chris Wanstrath, the CEO of San Francisco
collaboration-software company GitHub, who insists his title is nominal.
The company, whose products let teams work together to develop
software, often without the aid of management, has 89 employees.
At GitHub, a small cadre of top brass handles companywide issues and
external communications but doesn't give orders to workers. Teams of
employees decide which projects are priorities, and anyone is free to
join a project in whatever capacity they choose. "You have the power to
be where you are most useful," Mr. Wanstrath says.
Tim Clem, 30, was hired at GitHub last year for a back-end coding
job. A few months into the job, he persuaded other colleagues that the
company needed to develop a product for users of Microsoft Windows. He
spearheaded the project, hiring a team of staffers to help him create
the recently released application.
The bossless structure can be chaotic at times, he says, but "you
feel like there is total trust and an element of freedom and ownership.
It makes you want to do more," says Mr. Clem, who had previously worked
at a large tech firm and smaller start-ups.
Since it was founded in 1958, W.L. Gore has operated under what it
calls a "lattice" management structure, which relies on teams in place
of bosses and traditional chains of command, and which was discussed by
Malcolm Gladwell in his 2000 book "The Tipping Point."
Gore's 10,000 employees, mainly in engineering and manufacturing,
take on leadership roles based on their ability to "gain the respect of
peers," says Ms. Kelly, the CEO. Those who choose not to take the lead
also are valued, she adds, noting that the company prides itself on
staff "followership."
That doesn't mean that its workers are sheep. Frank Shipper, a
management professor at Salisbury University, in Salisbury, Md., has
been studying Gore for more than two decades and says its flat
management structure has helped the company stay innovative, because
ideas can come from anyone in the organization, regardless of tenure or
position.
Gore's employees, who are called "associates," each have a sponsor
to guide their career and orient them to company culture. Jim Grigsby,
an electrical engineer who joined Gore 13 years ago after working for
more traditional companies, including defense contractors, says his
sponsor urged him to spend a few days simply meeting people, even giving
him a list of names.
—Kate Linebaugh contributed to this article.
as published on yahoo finance.