Book of the Week: Three Ways of Getting Things Done, part two

Book: Getting Things Done. Hierarchy, Heterarchy and Responsible Autonomy. By Gerard Fairtlough. Triarchy Press.
In this second and last excerpt, the author teases out the differences between heterarchy and responsible autonomy:

For more information, see Triarchypress
Gerard Fairtlough:

Responsible autonomy will sometimes lead to disputes, for instance about the fairness of critique or interference on matters that are supposed to be within the capsule of an autonomous unit. There are external models for dispute resolution, like the law courts, arbitration procedures and the ombudsman system. At present, organizations generally use hierarchical methods to resolve disputes – the boss steps in and settles the matter. But it is perfectly possible to work out independent, heterarchical means of arbitration or judgement by third parties within the organization. Reliable methods for resolving disputes are part of effective encapsulation.

Summarizing the advantages of responsible autonomy: simplicity and speed of action, the creative potential of a CES and the appeal that autonomy has for many people. The advantages depend on good encapsulation and proper critique.

Heterarchy Compared with Responsible Autonomy.

These two ways of getting things done are similar in being non-hierarchical, but in other respects they are quite different. Heterarchy involves continuous interactions between individuals and sub-units in an organization as they decide what to do and how to coordinate their actions. The sheer density of this communication might require a lot of time and effort – a possible disadvantage for heterarchy. Responsible autonomy, if set up properly, means that sub-units are much more self-sufficient and that interaction between them is much less intense.

Each one of the three ways of getting things done is what sociologists call ‘an ideal type’. This means the concept is not encountered in its pure form in real organizations. For instance, no hierarchy, however dominant, can control everything. Likewise, because boundaries cannot in practice be drawn in a totally clear way, complete autonomy is never possible. And elements of hierarchy or autonomy will always creep into a heterarchical organization. So every actual organization is a mixture of hierarchy, heterarchy and autonomy – but in widely varying proportions.

All the same, the three concepts are valuable for gaining an understanding and discussing the different ways of getting things done in organizations. A full understanding of the three ways, and how they can be blended, will enable great improvements in organizations.

Are There Only Three Ways?

I am frequently asked why there are only three ways of getting things done in organizations. Well, I am not able to prove there are no further ways, but no one has been able to show me another. Various suggestions can be made. For instance, an organization might get things done through the love and respect that its members have for each other. But I don’t think love and respect are sufficient as ways of getting things done. They can, of course, have a profound influence on the culture of an organization, but in themselves they do not provide system or leadership.

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.