# Holacracy or Autocracy? Both!
Source: https://www.yegor256.com/2016/02/18/holacracy-autocracy.html
I strongly believe that while it is very effective to structure
an organization in a democratic and sociocratic way, a project
should be managed completely different.
A project should resemble a
[dictatorship]({% pst 2016/jul/2016-07-21-convince-me %}), authoritarian or military hierarchy
with a single strong, result-oriented leader who gives explicit orders
that are never doubted by subordinates and an explicitly defined hierarchy.
{% jb_picture_body %}
According to Wikipedia at the time of writing, a
[_holacracy_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holacracy) exists when
"authority and decision-making are distributed" while,
on the other hand,
[_autocracy_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autocracy) exists when
"supreme power is concentrated in the hands of one person."
When I say organization, I mean a team, a startup, a company, that
sort of thing. It's something with a brand, an office, a business entity
and a bank account. The role of an organization is very similar
to the role of a country or a government: to provide security
in exchange for freedom. Democracy in a country, as well as in a team,
guarantees _equality_ to its members,
which is the most important component of security.
A holacracy, also known as a "flat organization," technically refers to the absence
of bureaucracy, special privileges, expensive furniture and private parties
for top management. In a flat team, the distance between the CEO and
a junior programmer is very small. They sit together in the same room,
eat in the same cafe, and discuss team strategy like friends. There
are no "bosses" on a flat team, only "_leaders_." They don't give orders, they
_inspire_. They don't punish, they celebrate success and mourn failure
together with everybody. Well, that's the idea of a holacracy.
And it actually works. I've seen it many times.
{% quote The key objective of a project is to end, while an organization's objective is to survive %}
However, when we're talking about _project_ management, this very same approach will
have catastrophic consequences. A project is something very different
than a team. A project is a "temporary endeavor
undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result," according to
[PMBOK](https://www.pmi.org/PMBOK-Guide-and-Standards.aspx).
A project is something that starts and ends. The key objective of a project
is to _end_, while an organization's objective is to _survive_. See the
difference? A new mobile app, a conference, a new release, a round of
investments---these are examples of projects. They start, and they end. We
don't want any of them to live forever; we want them to finish as soon as
possible, and obviously with a positive outcome.
Because of this fundamental difference, a project must be managed by
an authoritative person who gives orders and
has enough guts to ensure those orders are obeyed. That person is
called a [_project manager_]({% pst 2016/may/2016-05-24-who-is-project-manager %})
(PM). And the project will be successful only if
its management structure is strictly hierarchical, just like in a military operation.
A project cannot be flat, or it will fall apart.
Since a project is a temporary endeavor, it doesn't give security to its
participants. And it doesn't take away our freedom. The arrangement is
different: A project gives us _money_ and takes our _time_. The project
basically says to all of us, its participants: "Let's get it done and go
our own ways." Having this philosophy in mind and understanding the motivation
of everybody involved, the PM must use instruments that have nothing to do
with what keeps the organization alive.
{% quote A project will finish successfully if we value discipline, subordination, awards, punishments, and rules %}
An organization/team/company/family will stay together for a long time if
we value things like tolerance, respect, patience, equality, and appreciation.
To the contrary, a project will finish successfully if we value completely
different things: discipline, subordination, awards, punishments, and rules.
To summarize my thoughts, I would say that a successful company combines
these two approaches by being a [matrix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_management)
organization that promotes holacracy in the team and autocracy in
the projects it is working on.