Pages
Holacracy
Chapter 1: Holacracy – Self-Regulating Systems in Motion
If Agile reengineers how workflows, then Holacracy reengineers how power flows. It is not a management style—it is a constitutional redesign of the organizational nervous system.
Traditional organizations tend to conflate roles with people, and authority with hierarchy. This leads to rigidity. When someone leaves, the structure collapses. When a decision is contested, it escalates. When change is needed, it depends on consensus, or worse, permission.
Holacracy starts from a different premise: organizations are living systems, and like all living systems, they need a way to sense and respond without waiting for centralized control.
From Roles to Rhythms
In most companies, roles are defined vaguely. Job titles like “Manager” or “Specialist” act as containers for both identity and responsibility. Holacracy separates these.
In a Holacratic system:
This is the first systems breakthrough. Instead of relying on positional authority, Holacracy distributes power to where the signal is strongest. It treats the organization as a dynamic set of roles connected by purpose—not a frozen hierarchy of people.
This separation is more than semantic. It is structural. It enables:
Tension as Signal
Most organizations treat tension as a problem. Holacracy treats it as a sensing mechanism. Tension is defined not as conflict, but as the felt sense that something could be improved.
Each role-holder is empowered to process tensions through governance meetings, where roles, accountabilities, and policies can be updated—without waiting for consensus.
In systems terms, this turns governance into feedback.
It does not require leadership to “know everything.” It requires the system to listen everywhere.
Circles as Nested Systems
Holacracy organizes roles into circles—semi-autonomous units that manage their own governance, operations, and boundaries.
Each circle:
This creates a nested architecture, where decision-making happens close to the source of information, but still integrates into the larger system. Like a cell in a body, each unit has autonomy, but remains part of a greater whole.
This structure embodies systems thinking:
Unlike flat organizations, which often collapse into informal hierarchies, Holacracy is not flat—it is fluid.
Governance as Living Code
Holacracy is not a suggestion. It is a constitution—a formal operating system for organizations.
This constitution defines:
This is what makes Holacracy self-regulating. It has rules for rewriting its own rules.
In software terms, it’s not a static program. It’s an autonomic protocol—a set of rules that adapt themselves through usage.
Senge might call it a learning governance. Meadows would see it as a system with feedback built into structure.
Kahneman would note how it reduces bias by standardizing decision pathways.
Beyond Leadership: Power in Process
In Holacracy, clarity does not come from command. It comes from process fidelity.
A leader is not a bottleneck of decisions. A leader is a steward of structure. Influence emerges from clarity of purpose, not charisma.
When someone asks, “Who’s in charge of this?” the answer is always: the role with that accountability. And when that accountability needs updating? The process is already there.
This radically reduces the cognitive and political load of change.
You don’t wait for a town hall.
You run a governance proposal.
You don’t need permission.
You need a process.
Systems Thinking Meets Governance
Holacracy, at its best, is systems thinking in organizational form. It replaces managerial intuition with architectural intention.
It transforms organizations from decision trees into evolutionary networks.
Every element—every role, every meeting, every tension—is a node in a loop. A carrier of information. A participant in the continual adaptation of the whole.
Holacracy is not perfect. But it is principled.
Its promise is simple, and radical:
“Let the organization run itself—not through chaos, but through conscious design.”
And like all good systems, its success is measured not by control—but by its capacity to learn, adapt, and evolve.
Chapter 2: Living Inside the System — A Day in the Life of a Holacracy Employee
You Don’t Work In a Hierarchy. You Work In a System.
When you first step into a Holacracy-powered organization, everything familiar dissolves quietly in the background. There are no cubicle walls or title-based privileges. You find no manager to report to, and no org chart to cling to. Yet, strangely, nothing feels chaotic. There is structure—but it’s alive. There is hierarchy—but it’s dynamic.
You haven’t joined a company.
You’ve entered a living system.
Roles, Not Ranks
In your previous job, you might have been “Marketing Manager.” A singular title, laden with assumptions—some clear, some unspoken.
Here, you hold roles instead.
You are:
These roles are specific, transparent, and adaptable. They don’t live in your job description. They live in the governance records—a shared system that anyone in the organization can see, question, or improve.
The shift is subtle but profound: You are no longer your title. You are your contribution.
Circles, Not Departments
In a traditional company, you would have a team and a boss. In Holacracy, you join circles—modular teams organized by purpose, not permanence.
Each circle is governed by roles, not people. You may be part of:
Every circle has:
Circles don’t report upward. They interlock—forming a fractal governance model that reflects systems thinking in motion.
Governance Meetings: Where Structure Evolves
Every few weeks, your circle holds a Governance Meeting. It isn’t a brainstorm or an argument. It’s a ritual of system design.
Anyone—yes, anyone—can propose:
The process is scripted. Tensions (which simply mean “something could be better”) are processed sequentially. The question isn’t “Do we agree?” but “Can anyone see a reason this will cause harm or limit the circle’s ability to work?”
In systems language: Governance is how structure learns.
Tactical Meetings: Where Work Gets Done
Governance changes the map. Tactical meetings move the work forward on that map.
You meet weekly or biweekly to:
You don’t ask for permission. You bring your tension. You raise an issue. You propose a next action.
There’s no status theatre, no slide decks. Just structured conversations designed to unblock the system and keep momentum.
Tensions Are Signals, Not Sins
In most companies, raising an issue can feel like making noise.
In Holacracy, a tension is a gift. It’s a signal from the system—data that something could evolve.
You learn to ask:
You don’t vent to a manager. You shape the system yourself.
Power is not given. It is exercised—within roles, through process.
Authority: Distributed, Not Delegated
In Holacracy, you don’t need permission to act within your role.
You have autonomy, bounded by clarity:
This prevents bottlenecks. It also prevents blame games. If you make a decision, you own the decision—not because someone said so, but because the system trusts your role to do so.
It’s not management. It’s membrane logic—where clarity is the gatekeeper of action.
The Rhythms of a Self-Organizing Workplace
In traditional organizations, time is divided by hierarchy: meetings cascade from management down, updates flow upward, and cycles are often designed around executive availability. In Holacracy, time is designed around the system. Meetings are not interruptions—they are interventions. Time is not a constraint—it is a structure for sense-making.
Below is how time unfolds—not as calendar blocks, but as layers of systemic feedback.
🕘 Typical Daily Rhythm — The Operational Pulse
Typical Daily Rhythm
Time
Activity
Purpose
9:00 AM
Daily Check-in / Async Status Update
Sync with self, update project board, scan tensions
10:00 AM
Focused Role Work
Execute responsibilities autonomously within defined roles
11:00 AM
Cross-Circle Collaboration / Micro-Tactical
Respond to requests, offer help, resolve minor tensions
1:00 PM
Deep Work Block
Build, create, analyze—protected time for high-leverage tasks
3:00 PM
Tactical Sync / Issue Escalation (if needed)
Bring blockers to a tactical forum or async resolution
5:00 PM
Reflection + Tension Logging
Capture learnings, track signals for governance improvement
There are no rows in this table
📘 Daily is for execution. But embedded within execution is constant sensing: “What’s unclear? What’s missing? What can be improved?”
📅 Typical Weekly Cycle — The Coordination Loop
Typical Weekly Cycle
Day
Activity
System Function
Monday
Team Tactical Meeting
Resolve operational tensions, update actions, realign projects
Tuesday
Role Work + Informal Syncs
Execute + clarify boundaries with peers
Wednesday
Optional 1-on-1 / Role Reflection
Peer feedback, check-ins, skills calibration
Thursday
Role Co-creation / Async Reviews
Propose changes, collaborate across roles
Friday
Governance Meeting
Adapt the structure: roles, policies, expectations
There are no rows in this table
📘 Each week is a loop. Tactical stabilizes flow; governance evolves structure; peer reflection ensures human calibration within system clarity.
📆 Typical Monthly Rhythm — The Structural Sprint
Typical Monthly Rhythm
Week
Focus
Outcome
Week 1
Metrics Review + Strategic Reflection
Align work with circle purpose, adjust focus
Week 2
Governance Deep Dive (Role Revamps or Additions)
Realign system structure with emerging work needs
Week 3
Open Proposal Week / Role Rebalancing
Employees propose new roles or shifts based on live tensions
Week 4
Showcase / Retrospective (Optional)
Share progress, reflect on what’s working or stalling
There are no rows in this table
📘 Month by month, the organization breathes: expanding where tension builds, pruning where clarity decays. Employees don’t wait for permission—they trigger evolution.
📊 Typical Quarterly Cadence — The Learning Pulse
Typical Quarterly Cadence
Month
Activity
Systems Learning Outcome
Month 1
Quarterly Strategic Alignment / Vision Sync
Circles update shared purpose and OKRs
Month 2
Learning + Development Reflection
Map skill growth across roles; propose learning loops
Month 3
Organizational Health Audit (Culture + Process)
Assess governance participation, process clarity, workload sync
There are no rows in this table
📘 Quarterly loops are not about forecasting. They are about listening—deeply—to where the system must evolve next.
📈 Typical Yearly Cycle — The Evolutionary Horizon
Typical Yearly Cycle
Quarter
Focus
System-Level Shift
Q1
Purpose Renewal + Market Sensing
Revisit org-wide direction; realign circle missions
Q2
Cross-Circle System Mapping + Platform Upgrades
Integrate learnings; evolve shared tools and templates
Q3
Culture Sensing + Storytelling Reset
Reanchor the narrative: Who are we becoming as an organization?
Q4
Succession Planning + High-Leverage Role Audit
Identify role fatigue, assess systemic gaps, plan redistributions
There are no rows in this table
📘 A year in Holacracy isn’t a cycle of leadership mandates—it is a rhythmic co-creation of structure, story, and strategy.
Rhythm as Infrastructure
In a Holacratic organization, time is not only measured in hours or quarters—it is measured in feedback loops.
Time here is not a container. It is the scaffolding of emergence.
To live in such a system is to live in a state of permanent adaptation—where structure is not fixed but perpetually re-authored by those who inhabit it.
And that is the true rhythm of an intelligent organization.
Summary: Holacracy in the Eyes of an Employee
Traditional Org vs Holacracy
Concept
Traditional Org
Holacracy
Job Structure
Fixed title
Multiple evolving roles
Authority
Delegated from above
Distributed by role
Management
Boss-subordinate
Peer-regulated circles
Decision-Making
Top-down
Structured and consent-driven
Change Process
Periodic and political
Continuous and procedural
Accountability
Vague and personal
Explicit and role-bound
There are no rows in this table
Final Reflection:
In a Holacracy-powered workplace, your power isn’t about your position. It’s about your clarity. The clarity of your roles, your purpose, and your commitments to the system.
The organization becomes a living, evolving organism—responsive not to authority, but to need.
And you?
You’re not just an employee.
You’re a co-designer of the system itself.
Chapter 3: The Architecture of Alignment — Link Roles in Holacracy
In traditional hierarchies, alignment is enforced vertically—command cascades downward, feedback struggles upward. Yet in living systems, alignment is not commanded. It is maintained through connection.
Holacracy, as a governance system, replaces the brittle scaffolding of static charts with a flexible architecture of roles and circles. At the heart of this architecture are link roles—dynamic bridges that connect nested parts of the organization into a coherent whole.
Link roles are not titles of power. They are structural solutions. They manage not people, but relationships between roles, ensuring that authority, feedback, and purpose flow seamlessly across the organization’s evolving boundaries.
Let’s explore the three primary link mechanisms that stitch a Holacracy-powered organization together.
🔗 1. The Lead Link: Steering Without Controlling
The Lead Link is perhaps the most visible of the link roles. This role connects a supercircle (a larger system) to its subcircle (a subset of roles), ensuring alignment between the broader organizational purpose and the executional work happening on the ground.
But the Lead Link does not act as a traditional manager. They do not assign tasks or enforce compliance. Rather, they:
The Lead Link ensures direction without micromanagement—a channel through which strategy becomes structure.
🔗 2. The Rep Link: The Voice of the System
While the Lead Link represents top-down priorities, the Rep Link provides the bottom-up counterpart. They serve as the voice of the subcircle within the governance of the supercircle, carrying upward the tensions and needs that emerge in operational work.
Their responsibilities include:
Think of the Rep Link as a neural signal, transmitting pain, pressure, or opportunity back to the central nervous system. It ensures that local information influences global decisions, making the system adaptive from within.
🔗 3. The Cross Link: Peer-to-Peer Alignment
Not all tensions travel up or down. Many occur laterally, between circles that are not in a parent-child relationship but are deeply interdependent—say, between marketing and product, or between finance and operations.
The Cross Link formalizes this relationship. It enables:
This role becomes essential in complex ecosystems where modularity must be preserved without sacrificing coherence. It is the connective tissue, ensuring the right hand knows what the left is doing—without collapsing both into the same arm.
🧭 Meta-Structure: The Anchor and Core Circle
Beyond link roles, Holacracy also introduces meta-structural concepts to shape the governance of the organization as a whole:
In complex deployments, these structures may also involve customized links that serve hybrid or temporary coordination roles, adjusting dynamically to the organization’s evolution.
Systemic Flows of Authority and Feedback
Link Role
Flows From
Flows To
Direction of Tension
Role Focus
Lead Link
Supercircle
Subcircle
Downward
Strategy, resourcing, role assignment
Rep Link
Subcircle
Supercircle
Upward
Operational feedback, systemic tension
Cross Link
Peer Circle
Peer Circle
Lateral
Collaboration across independent functions
There are no rows in this table
🧠 Systems Thinking Insight: Living Links in a Responsive Network
What emerges from this structure is not hierarchy, but interdependence. Link roles transform the organization into a networked organism, where every part has a voice, every function has a boundary, and every connection has a protocol.
Unlike in command-and-control environments, power in Holacracy is not a personal possession—it is embedded in roles and governed by process. The result is not disorder, but a distributed order, adaptive and constantly updating.
Donella Meadows once wrote:
“The least obvious part of the system, its function or purpose, is often the most crucial.”
Link roles are that subtle structure—rarely noticed, deeply vital. They do not create alignment by decree, but by design. And in a world where organizations must continuously evolve, such design is not a luxury. It is the operating system for conscious collaboration.
Chapter 4: Defining Circles and Roles – The Architecture of Adaptive Work
In traditional organizations, defining a team or a job title is often an exercise in abstraction—a vague summary of expectations, layered with assumptions and informal power. In Holacracy, the act of definition becomes precise. It is not about naming hierarchy. It is about designing structure. Defining a Circle or a Role is an act of systemic clarity.
Section I: Defining a Circle – The Organizational Cell
A Circle in Holacracy is not just a team. It is a semi-autonomous, self-governing unit of purpose. Think of it as a micro-organism in the broader ecosystem of the company. Each circle is alive with its own metabolism—processing tensions, evolving structure, and delivering outcomes.
Supporting Principles: Distributed Authority. Transparency. Tooling like Glassfrog.
Section II: Defining a Role – The Unit of Work in Motion
Roles in Holacracy are designed as micro-systems—individual nodes of clarity and autonomy. A role is not a person. It is a function, temporarily held.
The Org Chart That Thinks
In traditional companies, the org chart is a picture of power. In Holacracy, it is a living document of function. Circles are loops of feedback. Roles are dynamic nodes of energy. Governance Records are maps that change with every sprint, proposal, and tension.
In systems thinking terms:
“A role is a function node. A circle is a feedback loop. A governance record is a system map that learns.”
By grounding every definition in Purpose, Accountability, and Domain—and by evolving that definition continuously—Holacracy transforms structure from static to adaptive, from control to cognition.
This is not an organization. It is an organism—thinking, learning, becoming.
Chapter 5: A Real Circle in Motion — Designing the Content Circle
In the abstract, Holacracy can sound like philosophy. But in practice, it is architecture. And nowhere is this more evident than in the act of defining a Circle and its Roles. In this chapter, we step into the lived structure of a real example: the Content Circle. Common in marketing teams and media operations, this circle doesn’t just produce content—it produces coherence, visibility, and strategic voice.
🌐 Circle Definition: Content Circle
Purpose:
Elevate brand presence through compelling, strategic, and search-optimized content.
This is not a mission statement—it is a design vector. Every Role, every decision, every tension processed within the circle must align with this central purpose. It exists to shape not just what the organization says, but how the world hears it.
Strategy:
Prioritize thought leadership over volume. Lean into evergreen content. Optimize for search intent rather than trend-chasing.
📝 Roles within the Circle
✍️ 1. Copywriter
Purpose:
Translate strategy into clear, engaging language that inspires action.
Domains:
Accountabilities:
Strategy:
Favor clarity over cleverness. Write for skim-readers. Collaborate early with SEO Analyst and Content Strategist to align intent.
Talent Match:
A partner with writing and editorial skills.
📊 2. Content Strategist
Purpose:
Design and iterate a content roadmap that aligns with brand goals and audience needs.
Domains:
Accountabilities:
Strategy:
Use metrics to inform planning. Balance short-term campaigns with long-term brand narratives. Surface themes that amplify cross-circle efforts.
Talent Match:
A partner with research, strategic planning, and creative leadership capabilities.
🔍 3. SEO Analyst
Purpose:
Drive discoverability through evidence-based content optimization.
Domains:
Accountabilities:
Strategy:
Optimize for high-intent, mid-funnel search queries. Recommend pruning old content that underperforms. Track algorithm changes and brief team.
Talent Match:
A partner with a strong data mindset and technical SEO knowledge.
🧱 Governance Mechanics
📓 Governance Record (via Glassfrog)
Each role’s definition—its purpose, accountabilities, domains, and strategy—is codified and public. The governance record is a living system map. Proposals for changes are submitted, tested, and recorded transparently, making evolution accessible to all.
🔄 Relationship to Supercircle
🔎 Summary Table
Role Definition Summary
Role
Purpose
Key Domains
Strategy
Copywriter
Inspire action through writing
Copy style guide, final drafts
Prioritize clarity; align early with SEO and Strategy
Content Strategist
Align content with strategic goals and audience
Editorial calendar, messaging docs
Use data to inform direction; build long-term narratives
SEO Analyst
Improve visibility through optimization
SEO tools, analytics dashboards
Focus on mid-funnel queries; monitor algorithms and advise
There are no rows in this table
🤔 Systems Thinking Insight
In a traditional company, all three of these roles might sit beneath a single "Content Manager." That manager would allocate tasks, set priorities, and approve deliverables. But in Holacracy, authority doesn’t concentrate—it distributes. Power flows not from people, but from clear structure.
The result? Roles act with autonomy, partners work with purpose, and circles govern themselves in real time.
This is not flat hierarchy. It is living hierarchy.
And the Content Circle is but one cell in the organism of an adaptive organization.
Chapter 6: Meetings as Systemic Interfaces
In most organizations, meetings are either dreaded formalities or scattered rituals, often unclear in purpose and uneven in value. But in a Holacracy-powered organization, meetings are not just containers for communication—they are the operating system’s user interface. They are precise mechanisms engineered to process tensions, evolve structure, and enable the organization to sense, adapt, and respond.
Each meeting in Holacracy serves a distinct systemic function. They are not born out of tradition or convenience, but out of necessity—to keep the system alive, coherent, and evolving. Below, we explore the major types of meetings, their purpose, and the systems thinking insights embedded within them.
🧩 1. Governance Meetings
Purpose: Evolve the structure of the organization.
This is where the organization updates its own source code. Governance Meetings are structured spaces to define, amend, or remove roles, accountabilities, domains, and policies.
🧠 System Insight: This is where the system learns to learn.
⚙️ 2. Tactical Meetings
Purpose: Coordinate day-to-day execution and operations.
Tactical Meetings are the metabolic engine of the organization. They help roles track work, clear blocks, and move projects forward without bottlenecks.
🧠 System Insight: This is where the system performs.
🧽 3. Strategy Sessions (Optional but Powerful)
Purpose: Clarify local strategies for prioritization.
Though not required by the Holacracy Constitution, many circles choose to hold regular strategy sessions. These sessions provide a contextual lens for prioritizing work over a span of weeks or quarters.
🧠 System Insight: This is where the system focuses.
🔁 4. Role Alignment / Check-In Meetings
Purpose: Clarify boundaries and responsibilities.
Especially useful during onboarding or role changes, these meetings provide clarity around who does what.
🧠 System Insight: This is the system’s immune response to ambiguity.
💬 5. 1-on-1s (Contextual & Cultural)
Purpose: Support human development and feedback.
Though not a formal component of Holacracy, many organizations overlay coaching or mentoring practices.
🧠 System Insight: This is where the system nurtures its nodes.
📚 6: Cross-Circle Syncs or Alignment Meetings
Purpose: Maintain coherence across distributed circles.
As Holacracy allows for decentralized and autonomous circles, coordination challenges can emerge.
🧠 System Insight: This is the system’s vascular flow—connecting distributed limbs.
Conclusion: Designing the Meeting Nervous System
When meetings are intentional, every gathering becomes an opportunity for evolution. Governance is not bureaucracy; it's infrastructure. Tactical is not micromanagement; it's flow. Strategy is not a crystal ball; it's orientation.
By designing meetings to reflect the rhythms of a living system, Holacracy enables an organization to do more than scale. It enables it to sense, adapt, and become.
Chapter 7: Redesigning People Systems — Hiring, Growth & Rewards in Holacracy
In a conventional organization, human systems follow a clear chain: managers hire, promote, and evaluate individuals. But Holacracy isn’t person-centric. It’s role-centric. Authority lives in roles, not people. This transforms how organizations approach recruitment, development, and compensation.
Holacracy doesn’t eliminate these needs—it retools them through the operating system.
🧲 Section 1: Recruitment – Hiring for Talent, Matching to Roles
In traditional hiring, the goal is often to fill a job title—“Marketing Manager,” “Sales Executive,” “Operations Lead.” But titles are often vague proxies, loaded with assumptions. What do they actually do? Where does their authority begin and end? Who decides what success looks like?
In a Holacracy-powered organization, the question shifts from “Who do we need to hire?” to “What tensions need to be addressed, and what kind of talent can best respond?”
This is not semantics. It’s a systems shift.
🎯 Role-Based Clarity, Talent-Based Fit
Roles in Holacracy are defined not by prestige, but by clarity. Each role has:
But here’s the deeper truth: roles are not people. They are functions—containers for work. People are partners—dynamic, evolving, multi-faceted. The real art is in matching talent to roles, not squeezing talent into titles.
🔄 The Shift: From Title-Filling to Talent-Matching
Instead of hiring a “Marketing Manager,” you may be looking for someone to fill the following roles:
One candidate might match all three roles. Another might excel in just one—but bring unique system-level value. Hiring becomes about flexibility, contribution, and purpose-fit, not one-size-fits-all roles.
🤝 How the Process Works
🧠 Systems Thinking Insight: Recruitment as Sensing
In traditional companies, recruitment is a forecasting tool—we predict what we’ll need and hire for it.
In adaptive organizations, recruitment becomes a sensing function. We hire not to fulfill a static chart—but to address living tensions, expand capacity, and evolve our collective intelligence.
We don’t hire titles.
We don’t even just hire roles.
We hire people—and match them to roles, in service of purpose.
That’s the future of work.
Not hierarchy—but harmony.
Not control—but contribution.
📈 2. Career Path & Progression – A Horizontal, Not Vertical Game
Without job titles or fixed ladders, progression in Holacracy means expanding the number, complexity, and leverage of the roles you fill.
Progression Patterns:
Mechanism of Progression:
Book Analogy:
Career in Holacracy is not climbing a ladder—it’s like building out your constellation of roles in a galaxy of systems.
💰 3. Compensation – Paying for Roles, Leverage, and Contribution
Because individuals hold multiple roles, compensation must reflect a portfolio of contribution—not a title.
Common Practices:
Equity & Bonus:
Systems Insight:
You don’t get paid more because you’re a “director.” You get rewarded based on the complexity, scarcity, and systemic impact of the roles you fill.
🧺 4. Benefits – Supporting Partners, Not Employees
In Holacracy, individuals are often referred to as partners, not employees. This distinction shifts how benefits are framed:
Tooling Examples:
Benefits and agreements are usually codified in a Partner Agreement—separate from the Holacracy Constitution, but aligned with its principles.
🧠 Final Reflection: A People System for Living Organizations
Traditional orgs design people systems for predictability. Holacracy designs them for adaptability.
In systems thinking terms:
“The org doesn’t grow people by promoting them—it evolves them through role-fluid engagement with systemic tension.”
If you’re looking for stability, Holacracy may feel disorienting. But if you’re seeking autonomy, clarity, and evolution, it offers a new model—where growth is systemic, not political.
Chapter 8: LinkedIn in a Holacracy World – Redefining Your Professional Identity
In traditional organizations, LinkedIn mirrors the hierarchy. You hold a job title. You report to someone. You manage someone else. Your profile reads like a ladder—one role stacked atop another.
But what happens when the ladder dissolves into a network?
In a Holacracy-powered company, you don’t have a job title. You have roles. You don’t follow orders—you follow purpose. Your LinkedIn, then, becomes not just a resume, but a reflection of how work actually works: fluid, role-based, and systemically embedded.
🧩 Section 1: Redefining the Headline
Your headline is your first handshake with the world. In a self-managed organization, that handshake needs to say more than just “Manager.”
Instead of:
Marketing Manager at XYZ Company
Try:
Partner at XYZ Company | Roles: Content Strategist, SEO Analyst, Brand Steward (Holacracy-based Org)
Or:
Partner at XYZ Company (Holacracy) | Strategic Content & SEO | Systems-Driven Growth
🧠 Insight: This signals not just what you do, but how you do it: through roles, not ranks. Through systems, not silos.
🗂 Section 2: Experience that Reflects Reality
Your experience should show evolution, not entrenchment. Use your company’s name and describe your roles within it dynamically.
Company: XYZ Company
Title: Partner (Holacracy Practitioner)
Dates: [Start Date] – Present
Description:
I contribute to XYZ Company as a Holacracy Partner, operating through multiple evolving roles based on organizational purpose and systemic tension.
Current roles include:
In this distributed authority system, I self-manage, participate in governance, and help redesign our operational ecosystem through structured evolution.
🧠 Insight: This bridges clarity for recruiters and authenticity to your context. It educates, without alienating.
🌐 Section 3: Add Skills That Reflect the System
Standard keywords like “team player” and “results-driven” don’t capture your contribution inside Holacracy. Instead, highlight system and process fluency:
Certifications?
If you’ve trained with HolacracyOne or other recognized bodies, include those. They signal fluency in a rapidly evolving operating model.
📚 Section 4: About You, Systemically
Your "About" section is where philosophy meets personality. Here’s a possible narrative:
I operate within a Holacracy-powered organization where authority is distributed, not delegated. Roles—not job titles—define my work.
This enables me to contribute across functions, self-manage within clear boundaries, and evolve my responsibilities through governance. I work at the intersection of content, data, and systems design—where clarity creates speed and autonomy breeds innovation.
🧠 Insight: Think of this as narrative systems mapping: You are showing how your cognition and contribution flow through the organization.
🎯 Bonus: Portfolio & Role Visuals
If you’re building a portfolio or personal site, include:
🌀 Final Reflection: Your Org Chart is a Story
In Holacracy, the org chart updates in real-time. Your LinkedIn should too.
It is no longer a static portrait of power—but a living snapshot of purpose, function, and evolution. In a world moving from control to cognition, the way we write about our work must evolve too.
Your LinkedIn isn’t just who you are—it’s how your system thinks.
Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.