The Skill of Org Design

Notice how there are no clear criteria for evaluation in this space? No math. No models. Just loose concepts strung together with words and sprinkled with calls to authority (e.g., Andy Grove) to add credibility. No evidence. No science.<p>As an organizational &quot;scientist&quot; it&#x27;s amazing to me that organizations are ubiquitous and yet we know so little about how to construct good ones. Software design is in a better state IMO but not by much.<p>Here&#x27;s a simple question that should be answerable in any approach to org design. What&#x27;s the optimal *span of control* for management at each level in the organizational hierarchy? If you can&#x27;t answer this question, you can&#x27;t &quot;design&quot; an organization.

<p><pre><code> &quot;When running the Vietnam office, we had many other business-related problems to deal with; building consensus wasn’t something that I always had the time to do. So the way I ran certain org changes was to: 1. Get a sense for team receptivity for that org change, balanced against the necessity of the org change. If I sensed that the team would be resistant to the change, I would: 2. Figure out how much I had left in the ‘credibility&#x2F;trust’ bank, and if I wanted to burn that capital. 3. If possible, find a smaller, more reversible version of the org change to introduce first. 4. Use disasters to my full advantage (people are usually more receptive to trying new ways of doing things in the wake of something painful). 5. Strategically allow certain things to blow up so that I could exploit the pain to introduce org change, as per 4) above. 6. Or build consensus; consensus was always the best, if most time consuming, option.&quot; </code></pre> This is useful, and incredibly candid, information about what actions are taken to shape organizations, especially point 5. It&#x27;s great to see it written out like this.

This article reminded me of a group I founded in college. I also was motivated to ensure it lived on, which it has.<p>4 things worked there 1) it was a group to help people get jobs, which is an ongoing market need 2) it demonstrated success quickly and provided a template for that success, so people were motivated to invest in keeping it going 3) we made early cultural decisions that selected the right kind of people 4) we set out clear 5 year goals, and had every president update the 5 year plan and their own 1 year plan.

That&#x27;s a very intresting topic for a growing startup. I tried to find books about org design for startups but couldn&#x27;t find any. My conclusion was that it&#x27;s because &quot;it depends&quot; is only reasonable advice. But maybe there are some books that you recommend?

This 2016 longish post on Functional vs Unit Orgs by Steven Sinofsky is pretty good on different types of organizations. He shares examples from Apple, Google and his days at Microsoft being a senior leader. Even mentions another HN thread <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.learningbyshipping.com&#x2F;functional-versus-unit-organizations-6b82bfbaa57#.a4reg9rg0" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;medium.learningbyshipping.com&#x2F;functional-versus-unit...</a>

I want to put in a plug for Cedric. He is consistently one of the smartest writers about tech online. His writings about naturalistic decision making have changed the way I think about a lot of things in business.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commoncog.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;the-tacit-knowledge-series&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commoncog.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;the-tacit-knowledge-series&#x2F;</a>

Such a great read.<p>I&#x27;m trying to build a non profit org in a country with almost no culture of non profits and with zero experience in org design. Most of articles or podcasts on running non profits seems to be all the same – define vision&#x2F;mission&#x2F;strategy, plan budget, motivate people, do effective communication etc.<p>But this article is the first I found that actually provides some framework of thinking about the org design to me. Very refreshing. What should I read&#x2F;watch&#x2F;listen next (except links mentioned in the article)? Maybe even something specific to creating&#x2F;growing non profits?

I have two principles:<p>If possible do not split responsibilty between teams. Give responsibilities (e.g. security) as a hole without splitting.<p>Think about what discussion you want to have in the leadership meetings, then decide who needs to sit at the table.

I’m really impressed with this article and the others linked. The bits on professional services and thinking backwards were extremely helpful!

I was nodding along and then had to stop and think. Are Amazon and Netflix actually good organizational examples to emulate?

people will seemingly hop aboard anything that gives them authority over other people. i am reminded of that scientology grade chart that leaked a while back[1]. the end result of each training was usually the ability to give the training to others. so while all orgs obviously want to remain on a positive tipping point with the general membership rising to serve hierarchical functions over time, scientology teachings seem to exist mainly an opportunity to advance relative to other scientology members.<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;scientologymyths.info&#x2F;definitions&#x2F;gradechart.gif" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;scientologymyths.info&#x2F;definitions&#x2F;gradechart.gif</a>

In the press release:<p>&gt;&gt; “This concept for catalysis is as simple as it is ingenious, and the fact is that many people have wondered why we didn’t think of it earlier,” says Johan Åqvist, who is chair of the Nobel Committee for Chemistry.

You might want to look into the works of Elliot Jacques, who came up with apparently rigorous concepts about hierarchy and management since the 70s. Wrote a bunch of books. Interesting stuff, I find.

Wow, MPI gets Nobel prizes in a row!