via Thomas Dreller the differences in a community and hierarchy. To be honest in India it is difficult to build a community for the most part because as a society we are very feudal. This makes a peer to peer relationship extremely difficult.
The below is a very good explanation.
Recently I received feedback on reviving a starving community from one of the higher ranks:
“Based on what I have seen happening, the community could be successful in establishing its identity if there is some regular communication flowing from the top, for ex. a monthly summary.“
Somehow I felt there is something missing, or even wrong with this statement, and it took me some time for figuring out what it could be. I think I’ve got it now: It’s the top-down approach for establishing an identity, which I believe won’t work.
Gary Hamel once (The Future of Management) raised an interesting question:
“When in your life have you felt the most joyful and the most energized by work?… I bet it involved a group of people who were bound by their devotion to a common cause, who were undeterred by a lack of resources and undaunted by a lack of expertise, and who cared more about what they could accomplish together than how credit would be apportioned. In short, you were part of a community.“
Completely agree: It’s the common cause which forms the identity of the community, not the directed information flow, not the structured meeting place, not the existence of specific roles. Looking around, I see too much hierarchy, too many policies, and too little community. And, digging further, I found this little jewel that precisely explains why I didn’t feel well about this statement. The piece positions bureaucracy versus community:
Hierarchies are good at aggregating effort. Communities are good at mobilizing effort.
In a community, the interaction and exchange is voluntary – you give your skills, experience, bandwidth in return for the chance to make a difference, or exercise your talents. In a hierarchy, you get paid for doing what is assigned to you. It’s a contractual exchange.
In a bureaucracy, you are a factor in production. In a community you are a partner in cause.
Communities depend on norms, values, and gentle prodding of one’s peers. Bureaucracies rely on multiple layers of management and a web of policies.
In a bureaucracy individual contributions are circumscribed. Financial people work on finance. Marketing people market. In a community, capability and disposition are more important than credentials and job descriptions.
In a bureaucracy rewards are financial. In communities, the rewards are emotional.
Mull over it and please share your personal experiences
Leave a Reply