Comments on: Tech companies: open allocation is your only real option.

By: » Une seule option pour les entreprises technologiques :PME Revolution

» Une seule option pour les entreprises technologiques :PME Revolution — Sat, 04 May 2013 17:18:09 +0000

[...] (rapide) d’un long essais de Michael O Church sur le management dans les entreprises [...]

By: Gervais / MacLeod 23: Managers, mentors, executives, cops, and thugs | Michael O. Church

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:25:52 +0000

[...] a believer in Valve’s open allocation philosophy. I think that’s the right idea. Projects should compete for engineers (if no [...]

By: Seeking co-founders. [April 23, 2013] | Michael O. Church

Seeking co-founders. [April 23, 2013] | Michael O. Church — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 13:09:21 +0000

[...] Open allocation after 25 people. In our high-risk startup stage, we’ll make some autonomy compromises that are necessary to make the damn thing work. Laser focus. (We’ll be compromising our own autonomy, as its leaders, so it’s only fair…) However, once we’re de-risked, we simply won’t have jockeying for “plum projects” or “head count” squabbles as managers fight turf wars, because people will be able to transfer freely across the company, making projects compete for engineers rather than the reverse. No corrupt “transfer process” infrastructure that devolves into managerial extortion. I want a “stop-complaining-and-fix-the-damn-thing” culture where, instead of complaining to managers to get things done, people dive in and do it. [...]

By: The Disentitled Generation « Random Ramblings of Rude Reality

The Disentitled Generation « Random Ramblings of Rude Reality — Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:45:50 +0000

[...] wasting our time. Not a plastic trophy, but management that takes our career needs seriously and complete autonomy over our direction. We know that most people, in their work lives, end up with incompetent or parasitic bosses who [...]

By: The Disentitled Generation | Michael O. Church

The Disentitled Generation | Michael O. Church — Fri, 19 Apr 2013 12:11:46 +0000

By: Tech companies: open allocation is your only real option. | Architecture as a Service | Scoop.it

Sat, 06 Apr 2013 18:50:14 +0000

[...] I wrote, about a month ago, about Valve's policy of allowing employees to transfer freely within the company, symbolized by placing wheels under the desk (thereby creating a physical marker of thei… [...]

By: Gervais / MacLeod 21: Why Does Work Suck? | Michael O. Church

Gervais / MacLeod 21: Why Does Work Suck? | Michael O. Church — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:58:11 +0000

[...] makes a lot of sense amid convexity. That’s one of the reasons why I am so dogmatic about open allocation, at least in big [...]

By: Jag

Jag — Mon, 01 Apr 2013 20:43:21 +0000

Your comment made me recall an article I read about 5 years ago:
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Up-or-Out-Solving-the-IT-Turnover-Crisis.aspx

By: Gervais / MacLeod 18: more on trust, Square Root Syndrome, Brownian and Progressive Time | Michael O. Church

Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:57:48 +0000

[...] still don’t like Agile, because it’s built on fundamental closed-allocation assumptions. I dislike the idea of having a totalitarian Product Owner with unilateral [...]

By: Gervais / MacLeod 17: building the future, and financing lifestyle businesses | Michael O. Church

Tue, 26 Mar 2013 22:45:34 +0000

[...] growth is what often ruins the culture. Consider Valve’s self-executive open allocation, for an example of what is good. This is a great way of doing things, but it actually makes it very [...]