the fall of communism? the unhinging of capitalism? quick! someone find a NEW idea!

The people in every enterprise who do the work of that enterprise will become collectively their own board of directors. . .This proposal for workers to collectively become their own board of directors democratizes the enterprise. The people who work in an enterprise, the front line of those who have to live with what it does, where it goes, how it uses its wealth, they should be the people who have influence over the decisions it makes. That’s democracy.

Maybe we could even extend this argument to democracy in our political life, which leaves a little to be desired—some people call it a “formal” democracy that isn’t real. Maybe the problem all along has been that you can’t have a real democracy politically if you don’t have a real democracy underpinning it economically. If the workers are not in charge of their work situations, five days a week, 9 to 5, the major time of their adult lives, then how much aptitude and how much appetite are they going to have to control their political life? Maybe we need the democracy of economics, not just to prevent the regulations from being undone, but also to realize the political objectives of democracy.

This is the vision Dr. Richard Wolff proposes in his 39-minute video, Capitalism Hits the Fan, which analyzes the current financial meltdown. If you like the idea of being in a classroom listening to a brilliant, radical, sarcastic professor deliver his ideas about what’s really going on around here, you might like this video.  You can buy a more slick version, with PowerPoint graphs and a more appealing backdrop, on his website (isn’t capitalism wonderful?!)  I happen to like the rougher classroom version I’ve posted below; it seems more real and he is actually more passionate in this version. And more sarcastic.

One caution: you may have to get past his Marxist, socialist leanings. If you can open your mind to his analysis despite his sarcasm and opinionated approach to the subject, I think you’ll be glad you sat through the whole thing. I asked Dr. Wolff if he might think about different terminology, to make his ideas more palatable to the Western mind, but he says he is devoted to his “academic roots,” which I admire but which I also think is a marketing plunder. If you want people to hear and understand what you have to say, you do have to speak their language. He obviously doesn’t care so much about that, so if you want to hear and understand his ideas, you have to put aside whatever prejudices you might have. My brief email correspondence with him led me to believe that he is actually a humble fellow, appreciative of the attention his ideas are getting presently.

Another thing I like about this link is that the site includes discussion from people who disagree with Dr.Wolff and from some who agree and from others who have new ideas. New ideas. That’s what we need. And that’s what we should be talkin about…

Enjoy.

discard!

Governance refers to how decisions are made and how power is distributed. What is at question in this blog is . . . what form of organizational governance promotes and supports a good society?

 Imagine this: You’re on your way to work and you’re thinking about the meeting you have this morning as part of your company’s executive nominating committee. The group has screened the available candidates for a new COO and has narrowed the slate to three. The committee expects final discussion about the candidates to take place this morning =, along with discussion about how to present the candidates to the rest of the company; voting takes place on Wednesday. You have some strong reservations about one of the candidates, which you plan to bring up at this morning’s meeting. You know the CEO won’t agree with you on your opinion, and that in fact she absolutely loves the candidate you don’t feel so good about, but you feel you have an obligation to speak your mind to her and to others who will be voting.

Or imagine this: One of your company’s product development committees has come up with a new idea and has asked for feedback companywide. Even though you’re in the human resources group and not in sales and marketing, you’ve examined the product and  you’ve done some of your own research — after all, if a new product fails, your bonus is smaller and the company (and your investment in it) is at risk. After doing your homework, you think it’s a brilliant idea and you are going to give feecback encouraging the next phase of development — that is, if the next phase can be done within budget guidelines. You have some ideas about that, too, which could make the product even more profitable, and you’re going to talk to one of the committee members today to find out if you’re on the right track.

Or: Your bonus is due today! All employees, no matter what level, get a significant percent of Return on Investment, and while this hasn’t been a great year money-wise, you have a great job, and you’ll take home a little extra cash today.

**************************************************************************************************************

These are examples — simplistic, I know – of workplace democracy. Some of these scenarios may be happening to some degree in the organization you work for, so indeed, some degree of workplace democracy may exist where you work.

Now I know that there are various forms of democracy and that democracy isn’t a simple matter. When I say, Democracy in the Workplace Now!, I realize that little slogan may mean different things to different people. That’s why I’d like to generally define it for purposes of discussion on this blog.

But let me first also say that I realize not everyone prefers democracy as a form of governance — after all, rule by majority could be considered just as oppressive to the minority as rule of the few is to the majority. I myself think the Mahatma was on the right track when he said that the ideal form of government was an “enlightened anarchy,” where individuals know inherently and intuitively that survival depends on the common good.  (A successful organization that has employed this form of governance is Alcoholics Anonymous with 2 million members worldwide — the founder referred to its form of governance as a “benign anarchy” — another excellent model is the Quaker Church). But again, a discussion on benign or enlightened anarchy is part of a longer discussion for, perhaps, later. For now I am simply asking . . . does democracy work better as a form of governance than the autocracy or dictatorship set up in most organizations today?

I believe these are the main principles of democracy, and please ask yourself, on a scale of 1-10: Where does your workplace stand as a democratically governed entity?

• Democracy is a means for people to choose (vote for) leaders and to hold leaders accountable for their policies and their conduct in governance.
• Governance is based on the consent of the governed.
• Power flows from the people to leaders,  who hold power only temporarily.
• Laws and policies require majority support, but the rights of minorities are protected and supported in various ways.
• People are free to criticize their elected leaders and representatives, and to observe how they conduct business.
• Elected leaders listen to the people and respond to their needs and suggestions.
• Elections of leaders occur at regular intervals, as prescribed by written policy.  Those in power cannot extend their terms in office without asking for the consent of the people again in an election.
• Voters must be able to vote in secret, free of intimidation. 
• You have the right to have your own beliefs, and to say and write what you think. 
• There is freedom and pluralism in the media.
• No one may be arrested, imprisoned, or exiled arbitrarily. 
• If democracy is to work, people must not only participate and exercise their rights.  They must also observe certain principles and rules of democratic conduct.
• People should question the decisions of leaders, but not reject the leader’s elected authority.

For those of you who feel such principles sound absurd when applied to workplace governance, please ask yourself. . . Do democratic principles in the workplace seem absurd because we have so long been mired in the paradigm of workplace autocracy and dictatorship, or do they seem absurd because they are so far removed from where our own workplace stands in this form of governance, or both. Or is there some other reason we need to be talkin about?

Next Topic: CAN WORKPLACE DEMOCRACY CURE THE WEAKNESSES OF CAPITALISM? or WILL CAPITALISM HIT THE FAN?

A story about one workplace democracy
Another cool story
Yet another perspective on W.D.

unleash the power!

But the way I see it, labor unions have had little to do with democracy in the workplace.  Their original intent was to improve working conditions and ultimately resulted, at least in the U.S., in the 40-hour work week, paid vacation time and health care benefits, to name a few of the many gains unions have made. And those are good things. However, while they have helped redistribute some power, the real power, in almost all cases,  still rests in the hands of a few.

Like the American revolution and all revolutions fought against oppression, the labor movement reflects the longing for freedom, the longing we have for influence over our own personal destinies. Unfortunately, most of us are still longing for freedom and influence in our work lives, long after the labor movement began and whether there are unions where we work or not. For that matter, I often wonder if our beloved revolution has truly provided us with the freedom so yearned for by our forefathers and all who fought that sacred fight. In any event, the way I see it, unions have not fixed the problem of oppression in the workplace, including benevolent oppression.

 And that is what needs to be fixed. Today’s workplace is rife with “bosses”  placed ”over” other people. These “bosses” hold the destinies of employees in their hands, and while the autocracy is often benign, sometimes the hands that hold us are not kind, not looking out for the common good, and sometimes not even very stable. While unions may give employees a say over whether they get time off and health care benefits, they typically do not address the corporate decisions that ultimately affect employee destinies, particularly those about how capital is invested in a company, or at what cost (including ethical costs) profits will be made.  Labor unions have fought for worker rights, have made substantial gains in that area, and often act as a check against power abuses. But the power structure remains to be fought, or kept in check. It’s a familiar pattern with deep roots. You see, unions have addressed the symptoms of unequal power distribution in the workplace, but have not questioned the efficacy of  a workplace power elite. The union is a band aid, so to speak.

The ongoing battles between labor and management not only reflect the unequal distribution of power within U.S. organizations, these battles emphasize the unequal distribution of power. . . and therefore maintain it. The idea that disenfranchised employees must fight for what they need and want is the epitome of an us versus them consciousness and can’t possibly result in the kind of unity needed to produce full employee engagement and satisfaction.

Furthermore, many unions do not reflect democratic principles within themselves (many never have and have never claimed to) and therefore don’t truly serve their constituencies, even as they fight for reforms that might benefit those constituencies. Some say unions have suffered the same strains of greed and ego that afflict Wall Street firms. Some say unions have pushed too hard for way too much and have, as a result, diluted the influence they might have had. Many say that today, unions are irrelevant. I think that if labor unions are irrelevant, it’s because as I said (and it bears repeating), they address the symptoms of unequal power in the workplace and do not question the existence of the power structure itself. 

How do we build a workplace that doesn’t require a struggle between them and us? How do we in fact erase them and us as a workplace concept? What are some ways to build a workplace where power is shared, the workplace is rife with unity, and all are responsible and engaged?

And those are my questions for everyone. Radical times require radical solutions, and that’s what I’m talkin about!

Work Cooperatives
Corporations and Autocracy (see # 7)
Democracy Now

Next Topic: WORKPLACE DEMOCRACY DEFINED

workers of the world, come into the light!

Democracy cannot thrive if we only experience it for a moment of voting every two to four years. If day in and day out we go to a workplace that breeds helplessness and compliance, this becomes our generalized pattern of response to the larger questions of our society, and in fact most other aspects of our lives.

Peter Block, Stewardship, pg. 7

Peter Block blew my mind in his book Stewardship. I was writing the thesis for my Master of Arts degree in Leadership Studies and along came this author — finally! – with what I considered a radical approach to leadership in the workplace. “To state it bluntly,” he said, “strong leadership does not have within itself the capability to create the fundamental changes our organizations require. ” What he proposed was a participatory organization with power distributed throughout. He leaned heavily on democratic principles in the workplace and away from the idea that it was the responsibility of “leadership” to find the solutions, create the vision, or take full responsibility for what goes right or wrong. He called his idea ”stewardship,”  as opposed to “leadership.”

I have never been crazy about the word Block used to describe his vision for a workplace where everyone was responsible and all had a say in the decision-making. The word “stewardship” holds religious connotations for me, and just isn’t a powerful enough word for what he was describing, in my opinion. I wish he had called a spade a spade and referred to his idea as “democracy,”  not “stewardship” . . . because democracy is a powerful word indeed. And what we need at this critical time is something powerful, with a track record for success and the potential to change the world. Democracy in the workplace.

Stewardship was a guiding light for me as I made my way through my graduate program, along with Margaret Wheatley’s Leadership and the New Science, the work of Peter Senge, and the cooperatives of Mondragon, Spain, all of which have led me to my conclusion that democracy in the workplace is the answer to many of society’s economic, social and spiritual ills. I realize that the idea of a democratic workplace is often considered radical, though I’m not sure why, given the fact that democratic governance is something the United States holds as a sacred concept and practice, and a form of government many developed and underdeveloped nations strive to adopt.  Nevertheless, speaking of democracy in the workplace often evokes sneers and eye-rolling, and sends shivers down the spines of executives and managers who understandably want to protect their power, because that’s the way most corporations have always done it:  Autocracy in the workplace — in some instances, benign dictatorships.

I’m proposing that we open up to other ways of arranging governance and decision-making in the workplace. I’m proposing that at this point in the history of our fragile world we consider the idea that those who do the work might also be those who should be making the decisions about WHO should be making the decisions, if not making the decisions themselves about what to do. I’m asking us all to open our minds to the idea that the workplace doesn’t have to be framed in a pyramid with localized power at the top. Instead, we could actually have a workplace where there is no pyramid at all. A networked, interconnected workplace that actually fits into an ecological worldview. There are workplaces like that, I know, and in this blog I will refer to them often. But there are not nearly enough of them. I wish they could become the norm, rather than the exception.

This blog is designed to stimulate the idea that workplace democracy is an idea whose time has come. Each post will cover a topic. I hope my writing on the topic will point you in the direction of those who are writing about workplace democracy and implementing it in their organizations, I will refer to work that clarifies what a workplace democracy is and isn’t, and I hope to reveal to us our own hearts and souls — what do we want from work? Just a paycheck? I know that the answer for some will be “yes that’s all I want.” But I truly believe that if we could propose a better way, a more human and humane way, a more dynamic and fun way to do our work, those who have been asleep for so long might be willing to awaken to a way of working that is congruent to their true dreams and authentic selves. And that’s really what I’m talkin about. . .

Next topic: UNIONS AND WORKPLACE DEMOCRACY

Most democratic workplaces
Mondragon Cooperatives
Stewardship