Brainstorm help on defining full working team structure

Background context

We’ve used a form of sociocracy-like circles to get to a semi-functioning list of current roles and circle groups broken into “main”, “outreach”, and “website” circles, but it’s got definite issues.

I’m reading more about Sociocracy 3.0 to learn best practices from that as a new starting point for an overhaul.

I also have lots of thoughts that I’m struggling to organize, see my draft list of updated roles — this is focusing on aspects the current structure misses.

Moving forward from here

While we could just focus on using Sociocracy concepts to evolve our structure, I want to identify unfilled roles with adequate specifics in order to recruit new team members for specific roles.

An attempt at a driver statement:

Roles are not complete, defined well enough, or filled adequately. So, it’s sometimes unclear who should be taking care of what, what things are needed that nobody is handling, what expectations are for team members, or how to address situations where expectations aren’t being met.

We need a complete list of all the roles that, if filled, would get Snowdrift.coop fully launched with all key concerns addressed and all roles supported, sustained, and with clear succession plans.

Requesting discussion help

While we could discuss tweaks in our current setup, I’d like to have a clear generic chart to use as an example. Consider any similar organization, what are all the roles they have? Some use language like “CEO”, “CFO”, “COO”, “CTO” etc etc. We may not use that, but we need analogous or at least coverage of the same accountabilities. Maybe we can find some examples to use as models?

We could also just pick more specific tensions, get a big brainstormed list, and then work through that to try to get a proposed starting point.

My vision is to have something that looks like it may be complete, recruit to fill it all, and then use Sociocracy concepts to let it evolve from there.

Who’s up for helping here?

1 Like