A Practical Guide for Evolving Agile and

Resilient Organizations with Sociocracy 3.0

Bernhard Bockelbrink
James Priest
Liliana David

v2022-04-05
Contents

I. What is Sociocracy 3.0? 9

1. How does Sociocracy 3.0 help? 11

2. A pattern-based approach to organizational change 12

3. What’s in this guide? 14

4. Influences and History of Sociocracy 3.0 16

4.1. The Sociocracy 3.0 Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5. Why “3.0”? 19
5.1. The Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2. The New Model of Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
5.3. The Evolution of the Sociocratic Circle Organization
Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

II. The Seven Principles 24

1. The Principle of Effectiveness 27

1.1. Clarify the why . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
1.2. Keep your options open . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1.3. Aim for being effective in an efficient way . . . . . . . . . 28
1.4. Consider the bigger picture, monitor, evaluate and learn . 28
1.5. Be mindful of dependencies and constraints . . . . . . . . 29
1.6. Prioritize and choose wisely . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

1
2. The Principle of Consent 31
2.1. Invite dissent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
2.2. Shift supremacy from people to sound arguments . . . . . 32
2.3. Distinguish between opinion or preference, and objections 33
2.4. Integrate learning from objections . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
2.5. The Implicit Contract of Consent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

3. The Principle of Empiricism 35

3.1. Clarify your hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.2. Design good experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
3.3. Treat decisions as experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

4. The Principle of Continuous Improvement 39

4.1. Take an iterative approach to change . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.2. Monitor, measure and change things based on what you
learn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

5. The Principle of Equivalence 42

5.1. Delegate responsibility and power to influence . . . . . . . 43
5.2. Consider who should be involved and how . . . . . . . . . 44
5.3. Make necessary information available . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.4. Invest in learning and development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.5. Invite external influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

6. The Principle of Transparency 47

6.1. Clarify motivation for (more) transparency . . . . . . . . 48
6.2. Consider reasons for confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
6.3. Identify what information is valuable to record and share 48
6.4. Create and maintain a coherent system for recording in-
formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

7. The Principle of Accountability 50

7.1. Acknowledge shared accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
7.2. Make the hierarchy of accountability explicit . . . . . . . 51
7.3. Move from “holding to account” to self-accountability . . 52

ebook.2022.0405.2355 2
 7.4. Create conditions that enable accountability to thrive . . 52
7.5. Make implicit responsibilities explicit . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
7.6. Encourage self-accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

III. Key Concepts for Making Sense of Organizations 55

1. Drivers 57
1.1. Drivers, Value and Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

2. Domains 58
2.1. Evaluate and evolve domains regularly . . . . . . . . . . . 58
2.2. Delegating Responsibility for Domains . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.3. Drivers and Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

3. Objections 62
3.1. Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

4. Agreements 64

5. Governance and Operations 65

5.1. Related Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

IV. The Patterns 69

1. Sense-Making and Decision-Making 71

1.1. Respond to Organizational Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
1.2. Navigate via Tension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
1.3. Describe Organizational Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
1.4. Consent Decision-Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
1.5. Test Arguments Qualify as Objections . . . . . . . . . . . 86
1.6. Resolve Objections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
1.7. Evaluate And Evolve Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
1.8. Co-Create Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
1.9. Proposal Forming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

ebook.2022.0405.2355 3
 1.10. Reasoned Decision-Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
1.11. Role Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

2. Evolving Organizations 107

2.1. Clarify and Develop Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
2.2. Delegate Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
2.3. Clarify and Develop Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
2.4. Align Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
2.5. Create a Pull-System For Organizational Change . . . . . 119
2.6. Driver Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
2.7. Open Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

3. Peer Development 130

3.1. Ask For Help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
3.2. Peer Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
3.3. Peer Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
3.4. Development Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

4. Enablers of Co-Creation 135

4.1. Artful Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135
4.2. Adopt The Seven Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
4.3. Agree On Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
4.4. Involve Those Affected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
4.5. Breaking Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
4.6. Transparent Salary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
4.7. Contract For Successful Collaboration . . . . . . . . . . . 142
4.8. Support Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
4.9. Bylaws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

5. Building Organizations 148

5.1. Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
5.2. Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
5.3. Linking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
5.4. Double Linking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
5.5. Representative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

ebook.2022.0405.2355 4
 5.6. Open Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
5.7. Helping Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154

6. Bringing in S3 157
6.1. Adapt Patterns To Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
6.2. Be The Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
6.3. Invite Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157
6.4. Open Space For Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
6.5. Continuous Improvement Of Work Process . . . . . . . . . 159

7. Defining Agreements 162

7.1. Record Agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
7.2. Clarify Intended Outcome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
7.3. Describe Deliverables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
7.4. Evaluation Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
7.5. Logbook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
7.6. Logbook Keeper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

8. Meeting Formats 170

8.1. Retrospective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
8.2. Governance Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172
8.3. Daily Standup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
8.4. Planning And Review Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
8.5. Coordination Meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176

9. Meeting Practices 178

9.1. Rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
9.2. Facilitate Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
9.3. Prepare For Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
9.4. Check In . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
9.5. Evaluate Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
9.6. Meeting Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
9.7. Governance Facilitator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
9.8. Governance Backlog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

ebook.2022.0405.2355 5
10.Organizing Work 187
10.1. Backlog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
10.2. Prioritize Backlogs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
10.3. Visualize Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
10.4. Pull-System For Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
10.5. Limit Work in Progress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
10.6. Timebox Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
10.7. Coordinator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192

11.Organizational Structure 193

11.1. Delegate Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
11.2. Service Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
11.3. Peach Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194
11.4. Double-Linked Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
11.5. Service Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
11.6. Fractal Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

V. A Common Sense Framework for Organizations

and Teams 204

1. An Organization Where BOTH the People and the Organi-

zation can Thrive 206

2. Ten Principles for Evolving Teams and Organizations 208

3. Two Principles for Orientation 210

3.1. Principle 1 – Clarify Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
3.2. Principle 2 – Develop Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

4. Three Principles for Navigation 213

4.1. Principle 3 – Focus on Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
4.2. Principle 4 – Sense & Respond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
4.3. Principle 5 – Run Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

ebook.2022.0405.2355 6
5. Two Principles for Structure 217
5.1. Principle 6 – Enable Autonomy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
5.2. Principle 7 – Collaborate on Dependencies . . . . . . . . . 219

6. Three Principles for Transformation 221

6.1. Principle 8 – Invest in Learning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
6.2. Principle 9 – Intentionally Develop Culture . . . . . . . . 223
6.3. Principle 10 – Build Shared Mental Models . . . . . . . . 224

7. Where to Start? 225

VI. Appendix 227

1. Changelog 228
1.1. Changes 2022–04–05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
1.2. Changes 2022–02–04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
1.3. Changes 2022–01–27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
1.4. Changes 2021–09–22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
1.5. Changes 2021–09–03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
1.6. Changes 2021–08–15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
1.7. Changes 2021–06–18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
1.8. Changes 2021–05–15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
1.9. Changes 2021–03–15 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
1.10. Changes 2021–02–19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
1.11. Changes 2021–02–11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
1.12. Changes 2021–02–06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
1.13. Changes 2021–02–03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
1.14. Changes 2021–01–12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
1.15. Changes 2020–05–08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
1.16. Changes 2020–04–29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
1.17. Changes 2019–12–22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
1.18. Changes 2019–11–29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
1.19. Changes 2019–06–27 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
1.20. Changes 2019–05–03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

ebook.2022.0405.2355 7
 1.21. Changes 2019–03–08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
1.22. Changes 2018–08–17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
1.23. Changes 2018–03–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
1.24. Changes 2017–11–16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
1.25. Changes 2017–11–10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
1.26. Changes 2017–10–21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

2. Alphabetical List Of All Patterns 244

3. Links 251

4. License 252
4.1. Attribution of derivative works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

5. Disclaimer 254

6. The Intentional Commitment for Practitioners and

Teachers of Sociocracy 3.0 (ICPT) 255
6.1. Full Text of the ICPT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

7. Acknowledgments 257

8. Authors 259
8.1. Our Commitment to You . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260

9. Glossary 261

ebook.2022.0405.2355 8
 Part I.

What is Sociocracy 3.0?

9
Sociocracy 3.0 — a.k.a. “S3” — is social technology for evolving agile
and resilient organizations at any size, from small start-ups to large
international networks and multi-agency collaboration.
Inside this practical guide you’ll discover a comprehensive collection of
tried and tested concepts, principles and practices for improving
performance, engagement and wellbeing in organizations.
Since its launch in 2015, S3 patterns have been helping people across
a diverse range of organizational contexts to get the best out of col-
laboration. From start-ups to small and medium businesses, large in-
ternational organizations, investor-funded and nonprofit organizations,
families and communities.
Using S3 can help you to achieve your objectives and successfully
navigate complexity. You can make changes one step at a time, with-
out the need for sudden radical reorganization or planning a
long-term change initiative:
• Simply start with identifying your areas of greatest need and se-
lect one or more practices or guidelines that help.
• Proceed at your own pace, and develop your skills and compe-
tences as you go.
Regardless of your position in the organization, you’ll find many
proven ideas that are relevant and helpful for you.
Sociocracy 3.0 is free, and licensed under a Creative Commons Free
Culture License.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 10
1. How does Sociocracy 3.0 help?

S3 is a transformational technology for both individuals and the whole

organization that will help you figure out how to meet your organiza-
tion’s biggest challenges, take advantage of the opportunities you face
and resolve the most persistent problems.
Sociocracy 3.0 is designed to be flexible and supports experimentation
and learning. You can take whatever you need, adapt things to suit
your context and enrich your existing approach.
S3 integrates core concepts and practices found in agile methodologies,
lean management, Kanban (and KMM), Design Thinking, Teal Organi-
zations and the family of sociocracy-based governance methods (SCM/
Dynamic Governance, Holacracy® etc.). It’s complimentary and com-
patible with any agile or lean framework, including but not limited to
Scrum and its various scaling frameworks.

11
2. A pattern-based approach to
organizational change
S3 offers a pattern-based approach to organizational change.
A pattern is a process, practice or guideline that serves as a template
for successfully responding to a specific kind of challenge or opportu-
nity. S3 patterns are discovered through observing people working to-
gether in organizations to solve problems and respond to opportunities
they face. When you find that your habitual ways of doing things fail
to bring about the outcomes you expected or hope for, you can look to
S3 for patterns that might help.
Patterns are modular and adaptable, can be used independently, and
are mutually reinforcing, complementing one another when used in
combination. S3 patterns can be evolved and adapted to address your
specific needs.
In this guide, the patterns are grouped by topic into eleven categories
to help you more easily identify those that are useful to you:
• Sense-Making and Decision-Making
• Evolving Organizations
• Peer Development
• Enablers Of Co-Creation
• Building Organizations
• Bringing In S3
• Defining Agreements
• Meeting Formats

12
 • Meeting Practices
• Organizing Work
• Organizational Structure
By providing a menu of patterns to choose from according to need, S3
encourages an organic, iterative approach to change without a
huge upfront investment. It meets people where they are and helps
them move forward pulling in patterns at their own pace and according
to their unique context.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 13
3. What’s in this guide?

Inside this practical guide book you’ll discover:

• Useful concepts that will help you make more sense of your
organization and communicate effectively about where change is
needed.
• An organic, iterative approach to change that meets people
where they are and helps them move forward at their own pace
and according to their unique context and needs.
• Seven core principles of agile and sociocratic collaboration
• A coherent collection of 70+ practices and guidelines to help
you navigate complexity, and improve collaboration:
– Simple, facilitated formats that support teams in draw-
ing on the collective intelligence of the group and incremen-
tally processing available information into continuous im-
provement of work processes, products, services and skills.
– Group-practices to help organizations make the best use
of talent they already have, through people supporting
each other in building skills, accountability and engage-
ment.
– Simple tools for clarifying who does what, freeing peo-
ple up to decide and act for themselves as much as possible,
within clearly defined constraints that enable experimenta-
tion and development.
– Patterns for growing organizational structure beyond
hierarchies into flexible, decentralized networks where the

14
 flow of information and influence directly supports the cre-
ation of value.
• The Common Sense Framework, a tool for making sense of
teams and organizations and figuring out how to get started with
S3.
• A glossary with explanations for all the terms you might be un-
familiar with.
This practical guide to Sociocracy 3.0 is written and published by the
three co-developers of Sociocracy 3.0.
True to the mindset behind S3, this book will always be a work in
progress that grows and changes as we learn from people who are
experimenting with S3 in organizations around the world. Since we
started out 5 years ago, we have released several updates per year and
we’ll continue to do so in the years to come.
Even though several sections in this book are brief and may still be
rough around the edges, the content and explanations have been suf-
ficient for many people to get started with S3 and achieve positive
change in their organizations. We hope you’ll find it useful too.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 15
4. Influences and History of
Sociocracy 3.0

Figure 4.1.: Influences and history of Sociocracy 3.0

The literal meaning of the term sociocracy is “rule of the compan-

ions”: socio — from Latin socius — means “companion”, or “friend”,
and the suffix -cracy — from Ancient Greek ������ (krátos) — means
“power”, or “rule”.
The word sociocracy can be traced back to 1851, when Auguste
Comte suggested applying a scientific approach to society: states
would be governed by a body of scientists who are experts on society

16
(which he termed “sociologists”). In his opinion, this future, although
not yet achievable, would be inevitable.
A few decades later, Lester Frank Ward, used the word ‘sociocracy’
to describe the rule of people with relations with each other. Instead
of having sociologists at the center, he wanted to give more power and
responsibility to the individual, he imagined sociologists in a role as
researchers and consultant.
In 1926, the Dutch reformist educator and Quaker Kees Boeke, estab-
lished a residential school based on the principle of consent. Staff and
students were treated as equal participants in the governance of the
school, all decisions needed to be acceptable to everyone. He built this
version of sociocracy on Quaker principles and practices, and described
sociocracy as an evolution of democracy in his 1945 essay “Democracy
as it might be”.
Gerard Endenburg, also a Quaker and a student in Boeke’s school,
wanted to apply sociocracy in his family’s business, Endenburg Elek-
trotechniek. He created and evolved the Sociocratic Circle Organisa-
tion Method (SCM) (later becoming the “Sociocratic Method”), inte-
grating Boeke’s form of sociocracy with engineering and cybernetics. In
1978 Endenburg founded the Sociocratisch Centrum in Utrecht (which
is now the Sociocratic Center in Rotterdam) as a means to promote so-
ciocracy in and beyond the Netherlands. Since 1994 organizations in
the Netherlands using SCM are exempt from the legal requirement to
have a worker’s council.
During the late 1990s and early 2000s, several non-Dutch speaking
people came across sociocracy, but it wasn’t until 2007 when Sharon
Villines and John Buck launched their book, “We the People”, that
sociocracy became widely accessible to the English speaking world, and
from there has began to migrate into several other languages.
Sociocracy has proven to be effective for many organizations and com-
munities around the world, but it has yet to become viral.
In 2014 James Priest and Bernhard Bockelbrink came together
to co-create a body of Creative Commons licensed learning resources,

ebook.2022.0405.2355 17
synthesizing ideas from Sociocracy, Agile and Lean. They discovered
that organizations of all sizes need a flexible menu of practices and
structures – appropriate for their specific context – that enable the
evolution of a more sociocratic and agile approach to achieve greater
effectiveness, coherence, fulfillment and wellbeing. The first version of
Sociocracy 3.0. was launched in March 2015.
Liliana David joined the team soon after. Together they regularly
collaborate to make S3 available and applicable to as many organiza-
tions as possible, and provide resources under a Creative Commons
Free Culture License for people who want to learn, apply and tell
others about Sociocracy_3.0.

4.1. The Sociocracy 3.0 Movement

As interest in Sociocracy 3.0 grows there is a fast growing commu-

nity of people from a variety of backgrounds — pioneering consultants,
coaches, learning facilitators, and people applying S3 into their vari-
ous contexts — who share appreciation for the transformational poten-
tial of Sociocracy 3.0 to help organizations and their members thrive.
Many kindly dedicate some of their time to experimenting with and
sharing about S3, and who collaborate to learn from one another and
document experiences to inform the ongoing development and evolution
of the S3 and its various applications.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 18
5. Why “3.0”?
Sociocracy as a form of governance has been referred to since 1851.
Subsequently it has been developed and adapted by many different
people and organizations, including Gerard Endenburg, The Sociocracy
Group (TSG) and Brian Robertson (HolacracyOne).
Yet, outside the Netherlands sociocracy has until recently remained
largely unknown.
We love sociocracy because we see organizations and their members
thrive when they use elements of it to enrich or transform what they
currently do.
We also love agile, lean, Kanban, the Core Protocols, NVC, and many
other ideas too. We believe that the world will be a better place as
more organizations learn to pull from this cornucopia of awesome prac-
tices that are emerging into the world today, and learn to synthesize
them with what they already know.
Therefore we decided to devote some of our time to develop and evolve
Sociocracy, integrating it with many of these other potent ideas, to
make it available and applicable to as many organizations as possible.
To this end, we recognize the value of a strong identity, a radically dif-
ferent way of distribution, and of adapting the Sociocratic Circle Orga-
nization Method to improve its applicability.

5.1. The Name

The name “Sociocracy 3.0” demonstrates both respect to the lineage

and a significant step forward.

19
It also helps avoid the perception of us misrepresenting the Sociocratic
Circle Organization Method (SCM) as promoted by The Sociocracy
Group.

5.2. The New Model of Distribution

Sociocracy 3.0 employs a non-centralized model for distribution. This
is a paradigm shift in the way sociocracy is brought to people and orga-
nizations, and one that many people can relate to.
We support “viral” distribution through two key strategies:
• Sociocracy 3.0 is open: We want to encourage growth of a
vibrant ecosystem of applications and flavors of sociocracy, where
people share and discuss their insights and the adaptations they
are making for their specific context. To this end Sociocracy 3.0
puts emphasis on communicating the underlying principles and
explicitly invites the creativity of everyone to remix, extend and
adapt things to suit their needs.
• Sociocracy 3.0 is free: To eliminate the barrier of entry for
people and organizations we provide free resources under a Cre-
ative Commons Free Culture License to learn, practice and teach
Sociocracy 3.0. Everyone can use our resources without our ex-
plicit permission, even in a commercial context, or as a basis for
building their own resources, as long as they share their new re-
sources under the same license. We expect and support other or-
ganizations, consultants, coaches, learning facilitators and trainers
to follow our example and release their resources too.

5.3. The Evolution of the Sociocratic Circle

Organization Method
Maybe we need to make this explicit: Sociocracy 3.0 is not targeted
specifically at the existing community of people exploring the Socio-

ebook.2022.0405.2355 20
 Figure 5.1.: Three variants of sociocracy

ebook.2022.0405.2355 21
cratic Circle Organization Method, or at The Sociocracy Group (TSG).
The Sociocratic Circle Organization Method (SCM) is already well de-
veloped and many people appear to be mostly happy with it.
Yet from our direct experience, even for those organizations that have
heard about sociocracy, there are many obstacles to actually become
invested. With Sociocracy 3.0 we actively work on addressing and
eliminating what stands in the way.

Reducing Risk and Resistance

Sociocracy 3.0 meets organizations where they are and takes them on

a journey of continuous improvement. There’s no radical change or re-
organization. Sociocracy 3.0 provides a collection of independent and
principle-based patterns that an organization can pull in one by one to
become more effective. All patterns relate to a set of core principles, so
they can easily be adapted to context.

Shifting Focus From Aim (or Purpose) to Need

Sociocracy 3.0 moves primary focus from vision, mission, aims or pur-

pose, towards the source of motivation, and aligns the organization to-
wards discovering and addressing what it needs. Organizations which
are already need-driven, value driven or customer-centric, find this im-
mediately accessible.

Condensed to the Essentials

When looking at the norms, the Sociocratic Circle Organization

Method may look big and scary. By focusing on the essentials only,
Sociocracy 3.0 offers a lightweight approach to adapt and build on as
necessary.
This doesn’t mean to say it’s all easy: choosing to pull in Socioc-
racy 3.0’s patterns requires an investment in learning and un-learning.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 22
This is why it’s important to only pull in what you need, because
there’s no point to changing things if what you are doing is already
good enough.

Integration With Agile and Lean Thinking

The Sociocratic Circle Organization Method is an “empty” method

when it comes to operations and creating a culture of close collabo-
ration. Many organizations already implement or show preference for
lean and agile thinking for operations and collaboration. We believe
this is a great idea, so Sociocracy 3.0 is designed for easy adoption into
lean and agile organizations.

A New Way to Evolve Organizational Structure

The organizational structure according to the Sociocratic Circle Or-

ganization Method is modeled on a hierarchy of domains. We see an
increasing emergence of collaborative multi-stakeholder environments
and the need for a wider variety of patterns for organizational struc-
ture. Evolution of organizational structure happens naturally when the
flow of information and influence in an organization is incrementally
aligned to the flow of value. Sociocracy 3.0 provides a variety of struc-
tural patterns that can be combined to evolve structure as required and
in a flexible way.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 23
 Part II.

The Seven Principles

24
Sociocracy 3.0 is built on seven foundational principles which enable
sociocratic and agile collaboration. Since the seven principles are re-
flected in all of the patterns, understanding these principles is helpful
for adopting and paramount to adapting Sociocracy 3.0 patterns.
Practicing Sociocracy 3.0 helps people appreciate the essential value
that these core principles bring – both to individuals and to organiza-
tions – and supports their integration into organizational culture.

Figure 0.1.: The Seven Principles

The Principle of Effectiveness:

Devote time only to what brings you closer towards achieving
your organization’s overall objectives, so that you can make the
best use of your limited time, energy and resources.
The Principle of Consent:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 25
Raise, seek out and resolve objections to decisions and
actions, so that you can reduce the potential for undesirable conse-
quences and discover worthwhile ways to improve.
The Principle of Empiricism:
Test all assumptions you rely on through experiments and
continuous revision, so that you learn fast, make sense of things and
navigate complexity as effectively as you can.
The Principle of Continuous Improvement:
Regularly review the outcome of what you are doing, and then
make incremental improvements to what you do and how you
do it based on what you learn, so that you can adapt to changes
when necessary, and maintain or improve effectiveness over time.
The Principle of Equivalence:
Involve people in making and evolving decisions that affect
them, so that you increase engagement and accountability, and make
use of the distributed intelligence toward achieving and evolving your
objectives.
The Principle of Transparency:
Record all information that is valuable for the organization
and make it accessible to everyone in the organization, unless
there is a reason for confidentiality, so that everyone has the in-
formation they need to understand how to do their work in a way that
contributes most effectively to the whole.
The Principle of Accountability:
Respond when something is needed, do what you agreed to do,
and accept your share of responsibility for the course of the
organization, so that what needs doing gets done, nothing is over-
looked and everyone does what they can to contribute toward the effec-
tiveness and integrity of the organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 26
1. The Principle of Effectiveness

Devote time only to what brings you closer towards achieving

your organization’s overall objectives, so that you can make the
best use of your limited time, energy and resources.
The principle of effectiveness invites us to think consciously about
what we do and how we do things. It calls for the intentional consid-
eration of the consequences of our actions, both now and across time,
on our organizations but also on the wider environment and the world
at large.
Pursuing effectiveness requires that we act with intent to minimize
waste, remove impediments and, where possible, conduct ourselves
in ways that over time, lead to the greatest value creation possible,
through the synergy of our creativity, resources, energy and time.

1.1. Clarify the why

Being effective begins with getting clear about why you want to do
something and establishing an approximate idea of what it is you want
to achieve. Defining why the organization exists and the objectives it’s
trying to achieve helps everyone understand more about what they are
working toward and about how they can contribute in a meaningful
way. Without this clarity, it’s hard for individuals to contextualize
their work in the bigger picture. It’s also harder to qualify and quan-
tify what brings value and in which ways.

27
1.2. Keep your options open

There might be many ways to go about achieving your objectives and

sometimes your first choice might fail to meet the need. Keep your op-
tions open to avoid getting stuck in a particular trajectory as you learn
about ways to improve. Avoid converging too soon and take an itera-
tive approach whenever you can. In complexity, find ways to test any
hypotheses quickly, run multiple small experiments if possible, and
travel light so that you can pivot fast.

1.3. Aim for being effective in an efficient way

Effectiveness is about achieving the desired result, while efficiency is

about doing things with the least waste of your effort, resources and
time. It is entirely possible to do the “wrong” thing very efficiently,
so before optimizing for efficiency, ensure the outcome is what you in-
tended. Only then look for worthwhile improvements to produce the
same outcome in a more efficient manner.

1.4. Consider the bigger picture, monitor,

evaluate and learn

Be on the lookout for possible side-effects and unintended consequences

before, during and after any interventions you make. Consider direct
and indirect costs and negative externalities and be prepared to evolve
or change your activities or objectives, based on what you learn.
There are scales of effectiveness (and efficiency) that can only be ap-
preciated if we consider the wider context and consequences of our ac-
tions across time. Sometimes our activities might achieve the outcomes
we intended in the short term but with unfavorable consequences and
hidden costs that only reveal themselves across time. For example,
large scale, industrial agriculture produces huge yields very efficiently

ebook.2022.0405.2355 28
but over the long-term it leads to a critical depletion of topsoil and in-
creasing dependency on fertilizers, insecticides and weedkillers. This
can be a case of a short term gain but for long term pain.
In complex environments it is sometimes hard to figure out what effec-
tiveness would actually mean. Consider the perspective of others, even
if you are making a decision for yourself. Make the most of experience
and expertise distributed throughout your organization and reach out
to people with alternative points of view. Running your ideas past oth-
ers can help you to avoid consequences that you’d rather avoid, and
identify worthwhile ways to improve.
Decide how you will measure effectiveness, and if you’re collaborating
with others, develop and maintain a shared understanding of what this
will mean. Having established a clear “why” and defined the outcome
you intend to achieve, consider how you will measure results in a way
that allows you to see how you’re progressing (and whether anything
you are doing is useful at all!)
Effectiveness can sometimes only be determined in retrospect. Pay at-
tention to and reflect on the consequences of your actions, and then use
what you learn to improve your effectiveness next time.

1.5. Be mindful of dependencies and constraints

Aim to free everyone up to be able to act as autonomously as possi-

ble and do what you need to do to free yourself up as well. Make any
necessary dependencies between certain individuals and teams explicit,
and get together to co-create and evolve a coherent system to deal with
them, so that you can still deliver value fast when dependencies cannot
be avoided.
Clarify any constraints in which you need to operate. What are the
internal and external expectations, guidelines or rules? How do the
implicit or explicit values of your organization and the wider context
in which you are operating, enable or limit the decisions and actions

ebook.2022.0405.2355 29
you make? How will you operate within any specific boundaries? Who
do you need to communicate with if you see an argument for changing
something, or for making an exception to a rule?

1.6. Prioritize and choose wisely

Set priorities and stick to them unless you become aware of a reason
to change. Distractions, context switching and a lack of breaks or slack
time will inevitably lead to waste.
As well as getting clear on what you WILL do, be clear on what NOT
to do as well and aim to resolve impediments as they arise.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 30
2. The Principle of Consent

Raise, seek out and resolve objections to decisions and

actions, so that you can reduce the potential for undesirable conse-
quences and discover worthwhile ways to improve.
Deliberately seeking objections is a way to tap into the collective in-
telligence distributed throughout an organization and benefit from in-
sights we might otherwise miss. Examining proposals, decisions and ac-
tivity through the lens of different people’s perspectives helps to iden-
tify reasons why a decision or activity could lead to consequences that
would better be avoided, and if there are worthwhile ways to improve
things.
Adopting the principle of consent invites a change of focus in decision-
making, shifting intent from trying to reach agreement - can everyone
agree with this? - toward the practice of deliberately checking for ob-
jections - are there any arguments that reveal why this is not good
enough, safe enough or that there are worthwhile ways to improve?
Consent does not mean everyone is actively involved in making every
decision, as this would be ineffective. Instead it’s useful to make deci-
sions that, over time, free people up as much as possible to decide and
act to create value by themselves. It does however require adequate
transparency and mindfulness on the part of decision makers, to in-
form and involve people who would be impacted (to varying degrees),
or to invite those that can bring relevant experience or expertise (see
the Principle of Equivalence).

31
2.1. Invite dissent

When dealing with complexity, considering different perspectives, ex-

perience and expertise is a simple yet effective way for developing a
coherent shared understanding, out of which more effective decisions
can be made.
Developing a culture that welcomes dissenting opinions and where peo-
ple consider those opinions to discover any value they can bring gener-
ates greater engagement, psychological safety and support for decisions.

2.2. Shift supremacy from people to sound

arguments

When comparing the available paradigms for decision-making, the es-

sential difference lies in where ultimate authority for making a decision
is placed. In autocratic systems supremacy lies with an individual or
small group. In a system governed by majority vote, supremacy lies
with the majority (or those who can convince the majority of their
position). In a system aspiring toward consensus with unanimity,
supremacy lies with whoever decides to block a proposal or existing
agreement. In all three of these cases, a decision is made regardless of
whether the motive of those actors is aligned with the interest of the
system or not.
When a group or organization adopts the principle of consent,
supremacy shifts from any specific individual or group, to reasoned
arguments that reveal the potential for undesirable consequences that
would better be avoided or worthwhile ways to improve. This way,
people—regardless of their position, rank, function or role—are unable
to block decisions based solely on opinion, personal preference or rank.
Consent invites everyone to at least be reasonable, while still leaving
space for individuals to express diverse perspectives, opinions and
ideas.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 32
2.3. Distinguish between opinion or preference,
and objections
Consent draws on the intelligence distributed throughout an organiza-
tion, not only by inviting people to raise possible objections, but also
by inviting people to then examine those arguments, rooting out any
that are unfounded, evolving those they discover to be only partly true,
and revealing those that are valid objections. So it’s typically a good
idea to test arguments qualify as objections and only act on those that
do. This helps avoid wasting time on arguments based merely on opin-
ions, personal preference or bias.
Arguments that qualify as objections — at least as far as stakeholders
can tell — help a group in directing their effort toward making changes
in those areas where it’s necessary or worthwhile to adapt and improve.
Incremental improvement based on discovery and learning is built into
consent and is an inevitable consequence of adopting the principle.
Adopting the principle of consent shifts the aim of decision-making
towards identifying a solution that’s good enough for now, and where
there are no obvious worthwhile improvements that would justify
spending more time. This approach is far more effective than trying to
arrive at consensus with unanimity, where the aim is to accommodate
everyone’s personal preference and ideas.

2.4. Integrate learning from objections

Objections inform people of things that can be improved. Resolving ob-
jections typically means evolving (proposed) agreements and changing
activity in ways that render that argument void. Sometimes however,
there might be a reason why there is more to be gained from leaving
things unchanged despite the existence of a valid objection. Ultimately,
resolving objections involves weighing up pros and cons of any deci-
sion, both in relation to the specific situation a decision is intended
to address, but also in the context of the organization as a whole. In

ebook.2022.0405.2355 33
complexity there are typically no perfect or entirely correct decisions,
only those that (for now at least) appear good enough for now and
safe enough to try. Often all that is needed is a good enough next step
which allows us to learn empirically and adapt and evolve the decision
over time.
This facilitation of natural and incremental learning draws on the di-
versity of knowledge, experience and expertise distributed throughout
an organization. It helps to shift from a paradigm rooted in binary
thinking and polarization (either/or) to a continual process of syn-
ergy (both/and), which over time fosters stronger relationships between
peers as well.

2.5. The Implicit Contract of Consent

Adopting the principle of consent in a team, or in the organization as

a whole, has implications for how people approach decision-making,
dialogue and activity. Consider making this implicit contract of consent
explicit, to support members of the organization to adopt and apply
the principle of consent:
1. In the absence of objections to an agreement, I intend to follow
through on that agreement to the best of my ability.
2. As I become aware of them, I will share any possible objections to
(proposed) agreements and activity, with those directly responsi-
ble for them.
3. I’ll consider objections to proposals, agreements and activity that
I’m responsible for, and will work to resolve the objection if I can.
4. I’ll actively consider agreements that are due review, to check for
any possible objections.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 34
3. The Principle of Empiricism

Test all assumptions you rely on through experiments and

continuous revision, so that you learn fast, make sense of things and
navigate complexity as effectively as you can.
Empiricism — the foundation of the scientific method — is an essential
principle to embrace if we’re to navigate effectively in a complex world.
Not only are the environments in which organizations operate complex
but an organization is in itself a complex adaptive system. Knowledge
about an organizational system and its interactions is often tentative
and highly dependent on context.
Empiricism can help us to increase certainty and reduce self-delusion,
so that we can make the best use of our time. In our attempts to make
sense of things and to have a sense of certainty about what is happen-
ing, why it’s happening, what should happen next and what’s needed
to achieve that, we often draw conclusions without checking if the as-
sumptions they are built on are true and accurate. In complexity, what
we perceive as causation can often turn out to be mere correlation or
coincidence, and the outcomes of interventions we make will always
lead to some consequences we couldn’t predict.
Observing and probing systems, and making use of experimentation
to inform an iterative approach to change, supports ongoing learning
and helps an organization continuously develop to remain effective and
responsive to change.

35
3.1. Clarify your hypothesis

A hypothesis is a tentative explanation of a relationship between a spe-

cific cause and effect that is both testable and falsifiable. It provides a
starting point for experiments that prove or disprove that hypothesis.
In the context of organizations, you might develop hypotheses about
how a change to a work process or to the organizational structure
would improve effectiveness or reduce cost. Or about how rescheduling
a meeting would increase engagement, or making a certain change to a
product would attract a new customer segment while keeping existing
customers happy, and so on.
When faced with uncertainty, it helps to make any questions and as-
sumptions you have explicit and describe a clear hypothesis that allows
for answering those questions and validating if your assumptions are
true. A vague or ambiguous description will make assumptions hard
or even impossible to test, and trying to test too many assumptions at
once, might set you up on a long path where you learn little of value.
Less is often more.
One vital skill to develop when designing experiments is the ability to
distinguish between established knowledge and mere assump-
tions. By acknowledging what you don’t know yet and what you as-
sume to be more or less true, you can identify questions and assump-
tions around which to build a hypothesis.
In complex domains, a hypothesis-driven approach relies on experi-
ments to validate or disprove hypotheses, so that you can find viable
ideas or falsify them fast. Making sense of things through experimenta-
tion, not only enables you to more effectively achieve what you need or
desire but it can also help you to validate assumptions you have about
which objectives are worthwhile pursuing to start with.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 36
3.2. Design good experiments

An experiment is a controlled test designed to prove or disprove a hy-

pothesis. Experiments provide you with validated learning about how
to better respond to the challenges and opportunities you face. Out-
comes often provide you with the opportunity to refine your hypothe-
sis, or even develop new hypotheses that you can then test with further
experiments.
Before you start an experiment, it’s important to fully define and doc-
ument it. In the context of an organization, a good experiment will
consist of a list of things you need to do, and if helpful, how you need
to do them, as well as a list of variables you will track before, during
and/or after the experiment.
Define and document specific thresholds for success and failure of the
experiment related to your variables and add details about this to your
evaluation criteria. In particular, consider what you would accept as
evidence that your hypothesis is false. While an experiment is running,
avoid making changes to it, and if you do change something, document
those changes, otherwise your measurements may become meaningless.
It is vital that you measure before starting the experiment to
ensure that the threshold for success is not already met because you
made an error in your experiment’s design.

3.3. Treat decisions as experiments

In a complex system, it is impossible to predict all of the ways in which

that system will react to a particular intervention of change. Because
of this you can apply the concept of experimentation to the way you
approach decision-making as well. It’s valuable to view all significant
operational and governance decisions you make as experiments, and to
document the intended outcome and evaluation criteria in each case.
Make one decision at a time, starting with what appears to be an ap-
propriate or logical starting point and evolve those decisions iteratively,

ebook.2022.0405.2355 37
based on what you learn.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 38
4. The Principle of Continuous
Improvement
Regularly review the outcome of what you are doing, and then
make incremental improvements to what you do and how you
do it based on what you learn, so that you can adapt to changes
when necessary, and maintain or improve effectiveness over time.
Whereas the principles of Empiricism and Consent reveal opportuni-
ties for learning, Continuous Improvement relates to what we do with
what we learn. Continuous Improvement applies to how we conduct
our operations, but also to governance. Everything from the evolution
of strategies, policy, processes and guidelines, to the development of
products, services, competencies and skills, attitudes and behavior, cho-
sen values and tools, all can be continuously improved.

4.1. Take an iterative approach to change

Evolution is often more effective and more sustainable than revolution

which is rarely necessary or worthwhile unless you fail to continuously
improve a system when it’s needed. Especially in a complex environ-
ment, making many changes to a system at the same time can lead to
a mess that is difficult to fix. Consequences resulting from larger inter-
ventions are often hard to measure effectively, especially in complexity,
and the relationship between cause and effect will be difficult, if not
impossible to determine and evaluate.
Instead, consider changing things incrementally whenever you see an
opportunity for a small and worthwhile improvement, significantly re-

39
ducing the need for a large intervention. This will help you to effec-
tively adapt to changing environments, keep your organization and sys-
tems fit for purpose, and prevent things from descending into a state
that is costly or even impossible to repair.
Even when a large change is needed, go step by step, figuring
out how things need to be and adjust what you’re doing based
on what you learn. With small changes, assumptions can be tested
quickly and failure is more manageable. When a small experiment fails,
you can learn fast and if necessary, use what you learn to develop a
better experiment. When a large experiment fails, a lot of time and ef-
fort might be spent without learning much at all.
Be aware that if you change several things at the same time, you might
not be able to determine which of them lead to the effects you see, so
aim for one or only a few concurrent changes at a time.

4.2. Monitor, measure and change things based

on what you learn

Define the intended outcomes you expect a change will lead to

and be clear on how you will evaluate whatever occurs. When mak-
ing changes, be clear about the specifics of what you want to improve.
What positive consequences do you want to amplify and what negative
consequences do you want to dampen?
Monitor the consequences of your actions and reflect on what
you learn. Pay attention to what actually happens and whether or not
the results of your interventions reflect your assumptions and inten-
tions. This will help you keep track of whether or not your changes led
to improvements at all.
Remember that even if things don’t turn out as you expect sometimes,
this doesn’t necessarily mean that the results are negative. Sometimes
things turn out differently to how we’d assumed or intended. All out-
comes help us learn. Be open to whatever happens, consider the

ebook.2022.0405.2355 40
pros and cons of any unintended consequences that emerge and ac-
knowledge when it would be beneficial to do things differently, or to
aim for different results.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 41
5. The Principle of Equivalence

Involve people in making and evolving decisions that affect

them, so that you increase engagement and accountability, and make
use of the distributed intelligence toward achieving and evolving your
objectives.
Equivalence is important in organizational systems, precisely because
people are not equal to one other in a variety of ways and depending
on the context.
Equivalence increases engagement by giving people affected by deci-
sions the opportunity to influence those decisions to some degree.
By including people in making and evolving a decision that affects
them, they gain deeper understanding about the resulting decision,
the situation it’s intended to address, and the pros and cons that have
been weighed in the process. It also helps to keep systems more open
and transparent and reduces the potential for information vital to the
decision being overlooked or ignored. Depending on the level of involve-
ment, people might also have the opportunity to shape things accord-
ing to their preference, and in any case, participation in the decision-
making leads to a greater sense of ownership over what is decided.
People are more likely to take responsibility for following through on
decisions when they are involved in making them. This is further rein-
forced when ensuring affected parties have influence in adapting those
decisions later, should they discover reasons why a decision is no longer
good enough, or if they discover a viable way for improving something.
Decisions we develop together will always be ‘our’ decisions, whereas
decisions taken by others, will always be ‘theirs’ and will be appreci-

42
ated and supported more or less by others, depending on their personal
preference and point of view.
Some decisions will affect a large group of people, e.g. an entire de-
partment, or even the organization as a whole. Including those affected
in the decision-making process will yield benefits that reach far be-
yond the decision in question. People will build connection, trust and
a greater sense of community and belonging. For effectively involving
a large number of stakeholders in the decision-making process you can
use a variety of group facilitation techniques and online tools.

5.1. Delegate responsibility and power to

influence

To become or remain effective, organizations of any size benefit from

distributing work, and the power to influence decisions relating to that
work, throughout the organization. This helps to eliminate unnecessary
dependencies, so that people can create value unimpeded, without get-
ting bottlenecked, waiting on a decision-making hierarchy or the input
of others who are more distant from the work.
For matters that concern a large number of people, it makes sense
to delegate responsibility for making and evolving agreements to a
smaller group that has the necessary experience and expertise, who can
then inform and consult with others in the organization during their
decision-making process. With adequate transparency and some proac-
tivity in informing people affected by decisions of anything that is use-
ful for them to know, possible objections from all stakeholders can still
be quickly identified, qualified, and if necessary, resolved. In this way,
equivalence enables the delegation of responsibilities to individuals or
small groups, while still keeping the whole system open to discover and
draw on the collective intelligence of everyone involved.
Periodically rotating who takes a lead in decision-making helps build
trust, accountability and a more widely shared understanding of the

ebook.2022.0405.2355 43
context in which decisions are being made, because a growing number
of people will gain experience in that role.

5.2. Consider who should be involved and how

Everyone throughout an organization is impacted by all decisions to

some degree, because each decision will impact the whole in some way.
Equivalence in decision-making doesn’t mean everyone needs to be
involved in every decision all of the time. Nor does it mean that every-
one has to have the same amount of influence in every context where
they are affected. Equivalence means ensuring that those affected by
decisions are at least able to influence those decisions, on the basis of
arguments that reveal unintended consequences for the organization
that are preferable to avoid, and/or worthwhile ways for how things
can be improved. Put another way, the minimum requirement for
equivalence to exist is to hear and consider any possible objections
raised by people affected by decisions, and work to ensure that those
objections are resolved.
The degree of worthwhile involvement is context dependent. At one
end of the spectrum, it might be enough that decisions affecting oth-
ers are made initially by an individual or a smaller group and that
these decisions are then tested for any objections with those affected
afterwards. On the other end of the spectrum, equivalence could man-
ifest as a fully collaborative process where those affected participate in
decision-making from end-to-end. A middle road is a participatory ap-
proach that keeps people informed about progress and invites specific
input at various stages along the way.
Equivalence needs to be balanced with Effectiveness, enabled through
Transparency and constrained by Consent, for it to function at its best.
It’s valuable to weigh up the benefits of more or less involvement, ver-
sus the cost in terms of resources, energy and time.
For any decision of significance it’s good to ask yourself who, if anyone,
should be involved, and to what degree? Consider those who will be

ebook.2022.0405.2355 44
directly or indirectly impacted and those who will have responsibility
for acting on what you decide. While not directly related to Equiva-
lence, it might also be prudent to consider those who are not obviously
affected by a decision, but who could contribute with their influence,
experience and expertise.

5.3. Make necessary information available

For people to contribute in an effective way, they need access to rel-

evant information relating to the decision in question. It’s helpful to
develop a system for visualizing important decisions and broadcast-
ing about them to others. Visibility and the option for open dialogue
about what’s going on in the organization helps to build shared under-
standing, which, in turn, contributes toward more effective decisions
being made.

5.4. Invest in learning and development

When involving people in decision-making, everyone understanding

what objections are – and how they are distinct from concerns, opinion
or preference – will help people contribute to decisions in more mean-
ingful and effective ways. Put in place ways to gather any possible ob-
jections that people raise and develop a system to easily make them
available to the people directly responsible for making and evolving
those decisions.
In the case where people are responsible for making and evolving agree-
ments together on a regular basis, invest in everyone developing the
necessary competence and skills. This includes learning basic communi-
cation skills and developing fluency in whichever decision-making pro-
cesses you use.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 45
5.5. Invite external influence

Some decision-making will be improved through including a range of

perspectives and expertise. When looking for people with a worthwhile
perspective to bring, consider the wider organization and your external
environment too. Who has valuable expertise or experience from else-
where in the organization and who are your customers, investors and
other stakeholders? All of these people are affected in some way by the
consequences of decisions you make. As well as being open to consider
their suggestions and points of view, there might be times when ac-
tively inviting their opinion or involving them in certain decisions you
need to make, will inform you of better ways to achieve your goals.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 46
6. The Principle of Transparency

Record all information that is valuable for the organization

and make it accessible to everyone in the organization, unless
there is a reason for confidentiality, so that everyone has the in-
formation they need to understand how to do their work in a way that
contributes most effectively to the whole.
Transparency in an organization helps people understand what’s go-
ing on, what to expect and why things are done the way they are. It
reduces uncertainty, supports trust and trustworthiness and fosters ac-
countability.
Adequate transparency means that people either have direct access to
the information they need, or that they at least know where to go or
who to ask, to get access to it. Transparency helps everyone under-
stand when they can safely and effectively decide and act for them-
selves and when they need to involve others to respond to dependencies
they share.
Transparency supports us to learn from, and with each other. It helps
to reduce the potential of small problems growing into big ones because
we are more likely to spot mistakes and negative unintended conse-
quences more promptly.
Transparency facilitates the ongoing development and maintenance of a
coherent and adaptive learning organization. Having access to relevant
information helps us to quickly identify important needs and changes
and respond fast.

47
6.1. Clarify motivation for (more) transparency
Transparency is a means to an end, not an end in itself, so if you’re
looking to increase transparency in your organization, take the time to
clarify the reasons why. What are the challenges you are trying to solve
by introducing more transparency and/or what are the opportunities
you wish to pursue?
Introduce more transparency into your organization as a way to sup-
port learning and to free people up, not as a way to control them. Use
it as a way to improve performance, not leave people feeling unsafe to
do anything because they are anxious about being watched. Trans-
parency can enable co-creation and innovation but in a context where
failure is treated as negative, rather than an opportunity to learn, it
will impede people’s willingness to take risks and experiment.

6.2. Consider reasons for confidentiality

Be clear about information that is inappropriate to share. While se-
crecy can be associated with illicit or dubious affairs, there are many
legitimate reasons for confidentiality in organizations. Sometimes se-
crecy is necessary, for example, protection of people’s personal data
and affairs, security of assets or protection of intellectual property that
helps an organization achieve its goals.

6.3. Identify what information is valuable to

record and share
Consider carefully what information is worthwhile to record. Valuable
information worth recording typically includes:
• decisions that have been made, along with the information they
were based upon, who made them and the reasons why they were
made

ebook.2022.0405.2355 48
 • any information that supports people to make effective decisions,
such as details about the context, possibilities explored and any
important constraints
• information that helps with evaluating progress and outcomes,
including evaluation criteria, metrics, descriptions of intended
outcomes and details of any hypotheses upon which decisions are
being made
• information that reduces uncertainty and supports the develop-
ment of trust, such as finances and future plans
• useful insights and learning
• meeting minutes

6.4. Create and maintain a coherent system for

recording information

Documenting relevant information in a way that is coherent and ac-

cessible is an ongoing task that relies on everyone in the organization
playing their part. Developing a system for recording and sharing in-
formation and keeping it up to date takes time and effort. Choose tools
that make it simple to create, update, and cross-reference records, as
well as to search and retrieve information when it’s required. Make
clear which information is recorded and updated, by whom and when,
and structure records accordingly. Take the time to regularly check
through your records, ensure your system remains helpful and keep an
archive of historical information for reference.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 49
7. The Principle of Accountability

Respond when something is needed, do what you agreed to do,

and accept your share of responsibility for the course of the
organization, so that what needs doing gets done, nothing is over-
looked and everyone does what they can to contribute toward the effec-
tiveness and integrity of the organization.
Whenever we are part of a system (e.g. an organization, a community,
family or state) the consequence of our actions or inaction will impact
others in that same system for better or worse. Therefore we carry a
certain amount of responsibility for the wellbeing of the system.
In particular, when we choose to become part of an organization, we
enter into a transactional relationship with others, where we can expect
to receive something in exchange for taking care of one or more specific
needs the organization has.
The promise we make to take responsibility for things that need doing,
creates a dependency between us and those who depend on the fulfill-
ment of that promise.

7.1. Acknowledge shared accountability

The consequences of our action or inaction will affect the organization

in some way, so by becoming part of an organization we are taking
some responsibility for the wellbeing of the whole. Many responsibil-
ities within an organization are hard to anticipate, are undefined and
are undelegated. Therefore when members of an organization recognize
that they share accountability for the organization as a whole, they are

50
more inclined to step up, bring attention to important issues, and take
responsibility for things when needed. Problems and opportunities are
more likely to be acknowledged and dealt with and you reduce the risk
of developing a culture of looking the other way, or worse, a culture of
blame.
Many responsibilities are typically distributed throughout an organiza-
tion by way of delegation, meaning that people take responsibility for
specific work and decision-making. Whenever a responsibility is del-
egated by one party (the delegator) to another party (the delegatee),
accountability for results is shared between both parties. This is be-
cause either parties’ choices and actions (or inaction) will impact re-
sults. Furthermore the delegator is accountable for their decision to
delegate these responsibilities, and for their decision about whom to
delegate them to.
While it’s typically productive for delegatee(s) to take the lead in de-
ciding how to take care of their domain, regular communication be-
tween delegator and delegatee(s) provides a broader scope of perspec-
tive which in turn, supports strategic development and the effective
execution of work.
When people consider themselves accountable only for those things
that impact their immediate sphere of responsibility, many of the
things that would require attention but have not been delegated to
anyone in particular, or that appear to be someone else’s problem to
solve, would get missed.
Whenever you see an important issue, make sure it’s taken care of, ei-
ther by bringing it to the attention of others who will deal with it, or
by dealing with it yourself.

7.2. Make the hierarchy of accountability explicit

Most organizations have a hierarchy of delegation and therefore a hier-

archy of accountability. This means that accountability for outcomes

ebook.2022.0405.2355 51
is distributed throughout the organization, while overall accountabil-
ity for the integrity of the organization rests with whomever takes legal
responsibility for that organization as a whole. In many organizations
today, this generally points back up a leadership hierarchy to wherever
the buck stops. However, in other contexts, like a community for exam-
ple, overall accountability lies equally with everyone who is involved.
Whatever your particular organizational context, making the hierarchy
of accountability explicit is useful because it reveals the relationship
between delegator and delegatee(s).

7.3. Move from “holding to account” to

self-accountability

The principle of accountability applies to everyone. It promotes a shift

from being held to account by someone—which often leads to a culture
of fear and blame—towards a culture of self-accountability where ev-
eryone acknowledges the impact of their actions and inaction on others,
and on the system as a whole, and acts accordingly. In your relation-
ships with others, it relates to making and following through on com-
mitments you make, managing expectations, doing what you agree to
and answering for when you don’t.

7.4. Create conditions that enable accountability

to thrive

Merely clarifying what people can and cannot do is not enough to en-
courage a culture where accountability is embraced. In fact, alone, this
can have the opposite effect. To increase the level of self-accountability
in an organization there are various factors that can help:
• Involvement: the more that people are able to influence deci-
sions that affect them, the greater their sense of ownership will

ebook.2022.0405.2355 52
 be, and the greater the likelihood that they will share a sense of
accountability for the results (see also: The Principle of Equiva-
lence)
• Access to information: when people have the opportunity to
find out what is going on in the organization and why certain
decisions are made, they can figure out how they can best con-
tribute to the whole and be an active and artful member of the
organization (see also: The Principle of Transparency)
• Safety to disagree: when people are free to express their opin-
ions and learn how to listen and disagree in constructive ways,
the organization can rely on a broader scope of perspectives, ex-
periences and expertise, and people will feel more psychologically
safe and in control. (see also: The Principle of Consent)

7.5. Make implicit responsibilities explicit

When responsibilities are unclear, it can lead to mistaken assumptions

about who is responsible for what, double work, people crossing im-
portant boundaries, or failing to take action in response to important
situations. At the same time, when clarifying responsibilities, it’s im-
portant to avoid over-constraining people because doing so limits their
ability to make important decisions, innovate and act. This leads to a
reduction in their willingness to accept accountability.
Too much specificity or too much ambiguity around the scope of au-
thority people have to influence can lead to hesitation and waste. And
in the worst case it can mean that important things don’t get dealt
with at all.
Clarifying domains provides a way of explicitly delineating areas of re-
sponsibilities and defining where the edge to people’s autonomy lies.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 53
7.6. Encourage self-accountability

To encourage a culture with a high level of self-accountability, do your

part in creating a working environment where people voluntarily take
on the following responsibilities:
• Act within the constraints of any agreements governing domains
you are responsible for, that includes agreements related to the
organization itself, to the teams you are part of, and to the roles
you keep.
• Act in accordance with any explicitly defined organizational val-
ues.
• Be transparent and proactive in communicating with those you
share accountability with, if you realize that what you agreed to
is not the best course of action.
• Find others who can help you if you discover you’re unable to
take care of your responsibilities.
• Break agreements when you are certain the benefit to the orga-
nization outweighs the cost of waiting to amend that agreement
first. And take responsibility for any consequences, including fol-
lowing up as soon as possible with those affected.
• Speak up if you disagree with something or think it can be im-
proved in a worthwhile way, by raising possible objections as soon
as you become aware of them.
• Be proactive in responding to situations that could help or harm
the organization, either by dealing with them yourself directly, or
by finding the people who can, and letting them know.
• Aim to give your best contribution, both through the work you
are doing and in how you cooperate or directly collaborate with
others.
• Take responsibility for your ongoing learning and development,
and support others to do the same.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 54
 Part III.

Key Concepts for Making

Sense of Organizations

55
In this section you’ll learn about the following key concepts:
• Driver
• Domain
• Agreement
• Objection
• Governance and Operations
You will also discover how these concepts relate to value (and waste),
delegation (and accountability), self-organization, self-governance and
semi-autonomy.
When people understand these concepts, it gives them a common lan-
guage for describing clearly what’s going on in the organization. This
helps to increase shared understanding and enables constructive dia-
logue about what needs to be done.
For any terms you don’t understand, check out the glossary at the end.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 56
1. Drivers

A driver is a person’s or a group’s motive for responding to a specific

situation.
Drivers:
• can be used to derive goals, objectives, aims, mission, vision, pur-
pose
• can change over time

1.1. Drivers, Value and Waste

Value is the importance, worth or usefulness of something in relation

to a driver.
Waste is anything unnecessary for — or standing in the way of — a
(more) effective response to a driver.
By adopting the concept of value and waste, many practices and ideas
from lean production and lean software development can be uti-
lized by organizations pulling in S3 patterns:
• value stream mapping
• various strategies for eliminating waste
• the Kanban Method

57
2. Domains
A domain is a distinct area of influence, activity and decision-making
within an organization.
To make better use of their limited time, energy, and resources, peo-
ple in organizations distribute work between them by creating roles or
forming teams, units, or departments. In the process they are explicitly
or implicitly defining domains - distinct areas of responsibility and au-
tonomy. All domains are within the overall domain of an organization
and may overlap and/or be fully contained within other domains.
Any role or team’s purpose is to contribute towards the overall purpose
of the organization by taking care of a specific organizational need. In-
adequately defined domains typically lead to stakeholders having differ-
ent assumptions about areas of responsibility and autonomy. As a con-
sequence, both collaboration and distribution of work suffers because of
missed dependencies, double work, or work not done at all.
Clarifying domains makes the contract between the delegator (who del-
egate responsibility for a domain) and the delegatee(s) (to whom the
domain is delegated) explicit, which enables everyone to learn about
what works and what doesn’t, and to understand who is responsible for
what. A clear domain description with a reasonable amount of detail is
a necessary prerequisite for people to successfully evaluate and continu-
ously improve their work.

2.1. Evaluate and evolve domains regularly

People’s understanding of the organization is limited and the environ-
ment is always changing. Therefore it is essential that delegator, dele-

58
Figure 2.1.: Domains may overlap and/or be fully contained within
other domains

ebook.2022.0405.2355 59
gatee(s) and other relevant stakeholders regularly take the time to eval-
uate and evolve both the design of the domain and how people account
for it as their understanding of the domain deepens.
People might do a great job of accounting for a domain in the way it’s
designed, but the design of the domain might be primitive or flawed.
On the other hand, even if the design of a domain is poor in the first
iteration, through this process it will improve over time.

2.2. Delegating Responsibility for Domains

Delegation is the grant of authority by one party (the delegator) to an-

other (the delegatee) to account for a domain (i.e. to do certain things
and/or to make certain decisions), for which the delegator maintains
overall accountability.
Responsibility for domains is delegated to groups or individuals, who
then act within its defined constraints on their autonomy and influence.
When a domain is delegated to a group of people, they become a team,
when it’s delegated to an individual, they become a role keeper.
The delegatee(s) may do whatever they think will help them achieve
their purpose, unless it is outside the domain of the organization, ex-
plicitly forbidden, they violate somebody else’s (explicit) domain, or
impede other people’s contribution to the organization in some other
way.
Note: Things that are forbidden include explicit constraints laid out in
the domain description, any other agreements the delegatee(s) need to
keep, and legal and regulatory requirements.
The delegator still retains overall accountability for that domain, allo-
cates resources and often defines:
• the organizational need the domain is designed to respond to
• key responsibilities (key deliverables, any critical risks to man-
age, other essential work and decision-making being delegated)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 60
 • constraints to the autonomy and influence of the delega-
tee(s), usually related to the organization itself (dependencies,
involvement of the delegator, reporting etc.)

2.3. Drivers and Domains

It’s also possible to understand a domain in relation to organizational

drivers:
• the domain’s primary driver - the main driver the delegatee(s)
respond to
• the set of subdrivers the organization may benefit from address-
ing when responding to the domain’s primary driver, which in-
clude:
– key responsibilities (any driver following directly from the
domain’s primary driver)
– dependencies and external constraints (drivers relating
to other domains or to the environment beyond the organi-
zation) that constrain the delegatees’ autonomy

ebook.2022.0405.2355 61
3. Objections

An objection is an argument – relating to a proposal, agreement, ac-

tivity or the existing state of affairs – that reveals consequences or risks
you’d rather avoid, or demonstrates worthwhile ways to improve.
You can think of objections as a simple tool for harvesting distributed
intelligence and improving decision-making.
Be aware that withholding objections can harm the ability of individu-
als, teams or the whole organization to achieve their objectives.
It’s the responsibility of each individual in an organization to raise po-
tential objections to proposals, decisions, existing agreements or activi-
ties.
Those accountable for an activity or (proposed) agreement in question,
are responsible for considering arguments and addressing objections
that are raised, when doing so will help to meet the organization’s ob-
jectives.
When seeking out potential objections, consider:
• why the intended outcome would not be (fully) achieved: effec-
tiveness
• why it would be wasteful to proceed as proposed (or previously
agreed): efficiency
• the negative consequences something would have elsewhere (in
the same domain, in the wider organization, or beyond): side-
effects
The information revealed by objections can be used to improve:

62
 • current and planned activity
• how people execute on decisions
• existing agreements
• proposals
• shared understanding of drivers
Create a culture where people feel comfortable to raise potential ob-
jections at any time, so that they can relax into making decisions that
are good enough for now and safe enough to try. This encourages de-
veloping a preference for trying things out, instead of attempting to
anticipate and account for all possibilities in advance.
Harness a diversity of perspectives and be open to challenge your own,
to discover when and what to change, and enjoy iterating more rapidly,
running experiments and learning from the outcomes as you proceed.

3.1. Concerns
Not all arguments raised are objections, but they might reveal
concerns:.
A concern is an assumption that cannot (for now at least) be backed
up by reasoning or enough evidence to prove its relevance or validity to
those who are considering it.
Concerns can still inform people of ways to further evolve agreements,
including making changes to an agreement that alleviates the con-
cern, adding certain evaluation criteria, or adjusting the frequency of
the evaluation. Bring up concerns if you think it’s valuable to consider
them.
Determining whether an argument is an objection or concern is some-
times dependent on context.
If in doubt about whether you have an objection or a concern, be
proactive and check with others to see what they think too. (see Test
Arguments Qualify as Objections).

ebook.2022.0405.2355 63
4. Agreements

An agreement is an agreed upon guideline, process, protocol or policy

designed to guide the flow of value.
Shared guidelines about why, how and when to act, and what is specifi-
cally required, enable effective collaboration.
Agreements are created in response to organizational drivers, are regu-
larly reviewed and evolved as necessary.
Overall accountability for an agreement lies with the people that
make them.
An agreement can include delegation of specific responsibilities to
individuals or groups.

64
5. Governance and Operations

When people think about governance they often think of corporate

governance, the framework of rules, practices, and processes that are
used to direct and manage the company. Traditionally, many of these
decisions are seen to be made by managers in a management hierar-
chy but many others throughout an organization often make or at least
contribute to governance decisions as well, regardless whether they are
aware of it, or not. Governance happens not only on an organizational
level, but within teams and even on an individual level as well.
Most organizations and teams today benefit from developing capacity
for collective sense-making and harnessing a diversity of perspectives
to effectively make and evolve the decisions necessary to navigate in a
complex world.
Since there are so many decisions to make for an organization to run
effectively, S3 seeks to enable productivity by freeing people up to do
and decide as much as possible for themselves, while ensuring coher-
ence in collaboration for a successful and effective organization.
Greater autonomy of individuals and teams necessitates clear agree-
ments (i.e. guidelines and constraints) that enable smooth collabora-
tion between those teams and individuals, and that support achieve-
ment of both long-term and short-term objectives. Regular iterative
reviews and incremental evolution of agreements ensure they become,
and remain fit for purpose over time.
While a decision of short-term consequence can easily be amended on
the spot, making more consequential agreements that constrain peo-
ple’s behavior and activity, often benefits from a more participatory
and deliberate decision-making process. These agreements include but

65
are not limited to matters such as: strategy, priorities, distribution of
responsibilities and power to influence, work processes, and many deci-
sions about products and services.
Such agreements need to be documented, both to remember them and
to support effective review, and to be communicated to people affected
(who are ideally also involved in the creation and evolution of those
agreements).
Therefore it’s valuable to distinguish between two categories of activi-
ties in an organization, one of which we refer to as governance, and the
other as operations:
Governance in an organization (or a domain within it) is the process
of setting objectives and making and evolving decisions that guide peo-
ple towards achieving those objectives.
Operations is doing the work and organizing day-to-day activities
within the constraints defined through governance.
For each domain in an organization there is a governing body: people
with a mandate to make and evolve agreements which govern how the
people doing the work in that domain create value.
There are many ways to distribute work and governance. Sometimes
the governing body is a single person, e.g. in the case of a manager
who leads others. Other times a group of people govern themselves and
all members share responsibility for governance within the constraints
of their domain.
Governance decisions set constraints on activity and guide future
decisions.They relate to matters like:
• Work processes
• Policies and procedures about how people work together
• Organizational structure:
– Distributing responsibilities and power to influence by de-
signing domains and selecting people to account for them

ebook.2022.0405.2355 66
 – Accounting for dependencies between teams
• Distribution of resources
• Strategy (for the whole organization, for a team, product or role),
• Priorities and objectives
• Consequential decisions about products, services, tools, technol-
ogy, security etc.
Depending on the context, a team might make governance decisions:
• in dedicated governance meetings that are scheduled on a regular
basis
• on the fly, during the working day
• in a one-off meeting to deal with a specific topic
• in other types of meetings such as product meetings, planning
meetings or retrospectives, etc.
Wherever and whenever you make governance decisions, one thing
worth considering is documenting them somehow. This way you’ll be
able to remember what was agreed, so will others, and you’ll have
something to come back to when it’s time to review.

5.1. Related Concepts

Self-Governance: People governing themselves within the constraints

of a domain.
Semi-Autonomy: The autonomy of people to decide for themselves
how to create value, limited by the constraints of their domain, and by
objections brought by the delegator, representatives, or others.
Self-Organization: Any activity or process through which people
organize work. Self-organization happens within the constraints of a
domain, but without the direct influence of external agents. In any

ebook.2022.0405.2355 67
organization or team, self-organization co-exists with external influ-
ence (e.g. external objections or governance decisions that affect the
domain).
Depending on the constraints set by the delegator, teams have more
or less license to conduct governance and decide how they organize
their operations, and are therefore more or less self-governing and self-
organizing.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 68
 Part IV.

The Patterns

69
S3 offers a pattern-based approach to organizational change.
A pattern is a process, practice or guideline that serves as a template
for successfully responding to a specific kind of challenge or opportu-
nity.
Patterns are modular and adaptable, can be used independently, and
are mutually reinforcing, complementing one another when used in
combination. S3 patterns can be evolved and adapted to address your
specific needs.
In this guide, the patterns are grouped by topic into eleven categories
to help you more easily identify those that are useful to you:
• Sense-Making and Decision-Making
• Evolving Organizations
• Peer Development
• Enablers of Co-Creation
• Building Organizations
• Bringing in S3
• Defining Agreements
• Meeting Formats
• Meeting Practices
• Organizing Work
• Organizational Structure

ebook.2022.0405.2355 70
1. Sense-Making and
Decision-Making

1.1. Respond to Organizational Drivers

Clarify organizational drivers (i.e. what’s happening and

what’s needed in relation to the organization), and respond as
required.
Responses to organizational drivers include:
• direct action (operations)
• organizing how work will be done
• making governance decisions
The response to an organizational driver is typically treated as an ex-
periment that is evaluated and evolved over time.

Qualify Drivers as Organizational Drivers

A driver is a person’s or a group’s motive for responding to a specific

situation. A driver is considered an organizational driver if respond-
ing to it would help the organization generate value, eliminate waste or
avoid unintended consequences.
A simple way to qualify whether or not a driver falls within an organi-
zation’s domain is by checking:
Would it help the organization if we respond to this driver? Or would it
lead to unintended consequences if we don’t?

71
 Figure 1.1.: Possible responses to organizational drivers

ebook.2022.0405.2355 72
1.2. Navigate via Tension

Pay attention to tension you experience in relation to the or-

ganization, investigate the cause and pass on any organiza-
tional drivers you discover to the people accountable for the
appropriate domain.
Challenges and opportunities for an organization are revealed by
people bringing awareness to the reasons why they experience tension.
Note: In this context, a tension is a personal experience: a symptom
of dissonance between an individual’s perception of a situation, and
their expectations (or preferences).
To discover drivers, investigate what stimulates tension, and describe
what’s happening and what’s needed. Sometimes an inquiry reveals
misconceptions and the tension goes away.
When passing on a driver to another domain, it is often enough to
communicate what is happening and why you think it matters (the
effect on the organization). Let those responsible think about what’s
needed and what to do about it.

1.3. Describe Organizational Drivers

Describe organizational drivers to understand, communicate

and remember them.
Describing drivers may be done by a group or by an individual. De-
pending on their perspective, they may decide to explain a driver as a
problem to solve or an opportunity to leverage.
A simple way to describe a driver is by explaining:
• What’s happening …:
– the current situation
– the effect of this situation on the organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 73
Figure 1.2.: Navigate via Tension, Describe Organizational Drivers, Re-
spond To Organizational Drivers

ebook.2022.0405.2355 74
 • … and what’s needed:
– the need of the organization in relation to this situation
– the impact of attending to that need
Create a brief but comprehensive summary containing just enough in-
formation to clearly communicate the need for an action or a decision.
Aim for one or two sentences, so that the information is easy to re-
member and process.
Besides the summary, more details about the driver may be kept in the
logbook.

Figure 1.3.: Describe Organizational Drivers

Example:

“The kitchen is in disorder: there are no clean cups, the

sink is full of dishes and it’s not possible to quickly grab a
coffee and get right back to work. We need the kitchen in a
usable state so we can stay focused on our work.”

ebook.2022.0405.2355 75
1. Current Situation

“The kitchen is in disorder: there are no clean cups, the

sink is full of dishes …”
Describe the current situation:
• Briefly capture the essentials of what is happening, and, if neces-
sary, the context in which it occurs.
• Be objective - describe observations and avoid evaluation.

2. Effect

“… it’s not possible to quickly grab a coffee and get right

back to work.”
Explain the effect of this situation on the organization:
• Clarify why the situation needs attention: how does it affect the
organization?
• Be explicit about whether the effects are current or anticipated.
• Explain challenges, losses, opportunities or gains.

3. Need

“We need the kitchen in a usable state …”

Explain the need of the organization in relation to this situation:
• A need of an organization is anything a team (or individual)
requires to effectively account for a domain.
• Be specific on whose need it is (“we need”, “they need”, “I
need”).
• If there’s disagreement about the need, it helps to zoom out from
specific solutions and focus on what the organization is lacking in
this situation.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 76
4. Impact

“… so we can stay focused on our work”.

Describe the anticipated impact of attending to that need:
• Explain potential benefits, opportunities, or even the intended
outcome of responding to that need.
• The impact may be obvious or implicit, especially when the ef-
fects of the current situation are already described.

Review Drivers

Make sure to review drivers on a regular basis, to deepen you under-

standing of what’s happening and needed.
Helpful questions for a review include:
• Is the description of the situation (still) correct?
• Do we still associate the same needs with the situation?
• Is the driver still within our domain?
• Is the driver still relevant?

1.4. Consent Decision-Making

A (facilitated) group process for decision-making: invite ob-

jections, and consider information and knowledge revealed to
further evolve proposals or existing agreements.
Consent invites people to (at least) be reasonable and open to opportu-
nities for learning and improvement. When you apply the principle of
consent, you are agreeing to intentionally seek out objections.
An objection is an argument – relating to a proposal, agreement, ac-
tivity or the existing state of affairs – that reveals consequences or risks
you’d rather avoid, or demonstrates worthwhile ways to improve.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 77
 Figure 1.4.: Consent Decision-Making

ebook.2022.0405.2355 78
Proposals become agreements when they are considered good enough
for now and safe enough to try until the next review. Objections pre-
vent proposals from becoming agreements, but concerns do not.
Withholding objections can harm the ability of individuals, teams or
the whole organization to achieve their objectives.
Not all arguments raised are objections, but they might reveal con-
cerns:
A concern is an assumption that cannot (for now at least) be backed
up by reasoning or enough evidence to prove its relevance or validity to
those who are considering it.

Step 1: Consent to the Driver

Make sure the driver is summarized clearly enough and is relevant for
the group to respond to.
Facilitator asks: Are there any objections to this driver being de-
scribed clearly enough and relevant for us to respond to?
Note: If you have already consented to the driver at an earlier stage
in the process, there is no need to repeat this step here. However, in a
case where someone is presenting a proposal to a group of stakehold-
ers who were not involved in creating it, or if there are people who are
only now joining the decision-making process, check everyone under-
stands the driver for the proposal, and make sure that it’s described
clearly enough and it’s relevant for those present to respond to, before
considering the proposal itself.
As a general recommendation, aim to complete this step with meeting
attendees asynchronously, prior to the meeting. This will give you the
opportunity to make any refinements in advance and save wasting pre-
cious meeting time.
In case of objections that indicate:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 79
 • The driver is not described clearly enough: take time to
clarify and make any necessary changes to how the driver is sum-
marized until there are no further objections. Unless this will be
a quick fix, consider doing this after the meeting and defer mak-
ing the decision until the driver is clear.
• The driver is not relevant for this meeting /group: pass it
on to the appropriate person or team, or discard it.

Step 2: Present the Proposal

Share the proposal with everyone.

Facilitator asks the author(s) of the proposal: Would you please
present the proposal to everyone?
The author(s) of the proposal (tuners), present it to the group, includ-
ing details about who is responsible for what, a suggested review date
or frequency, and any identified evaluation criteria.
Preparation: Where possible, send out the proposal in advance of the
meeting, so that people can familiarize themselves with the content,
ask any clarifying questions, or even share improvement suggestions,
prior to the meeting. This saves taking up precious face-to-face meeting
time for things that can be done outside of the meeting.
Proposals are typically created by an individual or a group beforehand
but are sometimes suggested “on the fly”.
If you’re the one presenting a proposal, write it down, share it with the
others beforehand if possible and aim to keep your explanation concise
and clear. Describe it in a way that maximizes the potential that oth-
ers will understand what you are proposing, without requiring further
explanation.
Note: Involving stakeholders in the creation of a proposal can increase
engagement and accountability for whatever is decided because people
are more likely to take ownership of an agreement that they participate

ebook.2022.0405.2355 80
in creating. On the other hand, participatory or collaborative decision-
making requires people’s time and effort, so, only use it when the gains
are worthwhile.

Step 3: Understand the Proposal

Make sure everyone understands the proposal.

Facilitator asks: Are there any questions to understand this proposal
as it’s written here?
This is not a moment to get into dialogue about why a proposal has
been put together in a certain way, but simply to check that everyone
understands what is being proposed. Avoid “why” questions and focus
instead on “what do you mean by …” questions.
Clarifying questions sometimes reveal helpful ways to change the pro-
posal text to make it more clear. You can use this time to make edits
to the proposal, if it supports people’s understanding, but be wary of
changing what is actually being proposed at this stage.
Note: If the group is experienced with using Consent Decision-Making,
you might well make improvements to the proposal at this stage. How-
ever, if you’re less familiar, beware, you are very likely to slip into an-
other session of tuning the proposal, this time with everybody being
involved. You run the risk of wasting time attempting to reach consen-
sus, instead of proceeding with the process and evolving the proposal
based on objections (in step 7).
Tips for the Facilitator:
• Use a round and invite the tuners (or whoever created the pro-
posal) to answer one question at a time.
• Pick up on any “why” or “why not” questions and remind people
that the purpose of this step is simply to ensure understanding of
the current proposal, and not why the proposal was put together
in this particular way.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 81
Tips for everyone:
• Say “pass” if you don’t have a question or you’re unclear at this
point what your question is.
• Keep your questions and answers brief and to the point.
• Avoid preamble and stick to the point, e.g.: “Well, one thing that
is not so clear to me, or at least, that I want to make sure I un-
derstand correctly is …” or “I’m not sure how to phrase this, but
let me try”, etc.

Step 4: Brief Response

Get a sense of how this proposal lands with everyone.

Facilitator asks: What are your thoughts and feelings about the pro-
posal?
Hearing everyone sharing their reflections, opinions and feelings about
a proposal, helps to broaden people’s understanding and consider the
proposal from various points of view.
People’s responses can reveal useful information and might already re-
veal concerns or possible objections. At this stage, listen but avoid in-
teracting with what people say. This step is just about seeing the pro-
posal through each other’s eyes.
Examples:
• “I like that it’s simple and straightforward. It’s a great next step.”
• “I’m a bit concerned that this will take a lot of time, when there
are other important things that we need to take care of too.”
• “I think there are some essential things missing here, like A and
B for example.”
Tips for Facilitator:
• Invite a round.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 82
 • Specify how “brief” the “brief response” should be! This will de-
pend a lot on context and may range from a single sentence to
some minutes of each person’s time.
Tips for everyone:
• Avoid making comments or responding to what people share.
• Adjust your contribution to fit the time constraint.
• It’s valuable to hear something from everyone in this round, so
avoid passing. If you’re lost for words, you can still say something
like “I need some more time to think about it” or “I’m unsure at
this point where I stand”

Step 5: Check for Possible Objections

People consider the proposal and then indicate if they have possible ob-
jections or concerns.
This step is simply about identifying who has possible objections or
concerns. Arguments are heard in the next step.
If you came here from step 7 (Resolve One Objection), check
for further possible objections to the amended proposal.
The facilitator asks: Are there any possible objections, or concerns
to this proposal?
Remember: concerns don’t stop proposals becoming agreements, only
qualified objections do. Concerns are heard in Step 9, after celebrating
reaching an agreement!
Tips for the facilitator:
In case the distinction between objections and concerns is still unclear
for some people, remind them:
• An objection is an argument – relating to a proposal, agreement,
activity or the existing state of affairs – that reveals consequences
or risks you’d rather avoid, or demonstrates worthwhile ways to
improve.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 83
 • A concern is an assumption that cannot (for now at least) be
backed up by reasoning or enough evidence to prove its relevance
or validity to those who are considering it.
• Proposals become agreements when they are considered good
enough for now and safe enough to try until the next review.
Tips for everyone:
• Many groups use hand signs as a way to indicate quickly and
clearly if anyone has any possible objections or concerns. If you
are new to the process and concerned that you may be influenced
by each other, wait until everyone is ready and then show hands
simultaneously.
• If you are in doubt between a possible objection or a concern,
share it as a possible objection so that you can check with others
to test if it qualifies.
If no one indicates having any possible objections, you have
reached agreement, move on to step 8 (Celebrate)!

Step 6: Test One Argument Qualifies as Objection

Use your limited time and resources wisely by testing if arguments qual-
ify as objections and only acting on those that do.
Typically it’s most effective to take one possible objection at a
time, test if it qualifies as an objection, and if it does, resolve the ob-
jection before moving on to the next argument.
Tip for the Facilitator: In case there are several possible objections,
explain to everyone that you’re going to choose one person at a time,
to share one argument. Clarify with everyone that, if having heard the
argument, someone believes it would be more effective to consider one
of their arguments first, they should speak up.
Check that the argument reveals how leaving the proposal unchanged:
• leads to consequences you want to avoid,

ebook.2022.0405.2355 84
 • could lead to consequences you want to avoid and it’s a risk you
don’t want to take,
• or informs you of a worthwhile way to improve how to go about
achieving your objectives.
See pattern Test Arguments Qualify as Objections for more details.
If the argument doesn’t qualify as an objection, go back to
step 5 (Check for Possible Objections), otherwise continue to
the next step.

Step 7: Resolve the Objection

Improve the proposal, based on the information revealed by the objection

revealed in the previous step.
See pattern Resolve Objections for details.
Once the objection is resolved, return to step 5.

Step 8: Celebrate!

Amazing! You made an agreement! And, with practice, you’ll

get faster as well! Take a moment to acknowledge the fact that an
agreement has been made. Celebrate!

Step 9: Consider Concerns

After celebrating, consider if any concerns you have are worth voicing
to the group before moving on to the next topic. If not, at least record
them after the meeting, alongside the evaluation criteria for this agree-
ment. Information about concerns might be useful for informing the
evaluation of the agreement when the time comes for it to be reviewed.
Facilitator asks those with concerns: Are there any concerns
worth hearing now? If not, please at least ensure that they are recorded
alongside the evaluation criteria for this agreement.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 85
Sometimes, what someone thought was a concern, turns out to be an
objection. In this case, you can resolve it by amending your just-made
agreement using the Resolve Objections process.
A Final Note:
If you are new to using Consent Decision-Making, we recommend you
strictly follow the process until you become familiar with it and thor-
oughly understand all of the steps. Once you get more experience, you
might hop¹ around between steps, but doing this in the beginning can
lead to confusion, and even, chaos.
¹For example, if there is a general expression of concern voiced dur-
ing the Brief Response round, the facilitator (or another member of
the group) might suggest evolving the proposal on the spot, to include
points that people inferred. In this case, always check if there is any
objection to doing so, first.

1.5. Test Arguments Qualify as Objections

Utilize your limited time and resources wisely by testing if

arguments qualify as objections and only acting on those that
do.
When someone raises an argument for changing something, check that
the argument reveals how leaving things unchanged will – or could —
lead to consequences you want to avoid, or that it informs you of a
worthwhile way to improve how to go about achieving your objectives.
Explore and refine each argument as necessary to identify any miscon-
ceptions or misunderstanding, and to eliminate aspects of the argument
that are based merely on assumptions, or a personal preference or opin-
ion. If you establish that what remains of the argument qualifies as an
objection, then go on to resolve the objection.
To discover if an argument qualifies as an objection in a group context,
a facilitator can invite reflection by asking:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 86
“Do you think this argument qualifies as an objection?”
If no one disagrees, treat the argument as an objection. In case of dis-
agreement, invite a dialogue to discover if an objection is revealed by
the argument.

Understanding Objections

Some helpful questions:

• How does the argument relate to this specific proposal or agree-
ment?
• Does the argument reveal how a (proposed or current) activity
or agreement:
– harms response to any organizational driver?
– can be improved right now?
– prevents or diminishes someone’s contribution towards re-
sponding to a driver?
– is in conflict with the organization’s values?
– is considered not ‘safe enough’ to try?

1.6. Resolve Objections

Use the information revealed by an objection to identify ways
to evolve proposals, agreements and actions to a good-enough
state.
Typically it’s most effective to take one objection at a time, come
up with a proposal for an amendment, resolve any objections to that
amendment, and then continue with the next objection to the overall
proposal.
A proposal becomes an agreement when all objections have been re-
solved.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 87
Figure 1.5.: A process for testing if an argument qualifies as an objec-
tion

ebook.2022.0405.2355 88
Objections are resolved by amending the proposal. Amendments can
include:
• adding, removing and/or changing something in the proposal.
• deferring resolution of a particular objection until later. (Remem-
ber to clarify who will take responsibility for this, by when and
what will happen after that).
• an alternative proposal, or an agreement to (co-)create a new pro-
posal in future (if it’s considered more effective than continuing
to work on developing the existing proposal).
• delegating the task to review, research, and/or propose an
amendment for one, or even several related objections, to an
individual or group.
• leaving the main proposal unchanged and monitoring the out-
come because the effort, or cost of changing things to resolve the
objection, outweighs the anticipated benefits or gain.
• asking a delegator for feedback or input (e.g. when agreeing on a
strategy for a subdomain).
• take some more time for reflection and then come back to the
objection again later.
• etc.
There’s always an iterative next step of some kind that you can take!
Even if a proposal doesn’t fully address the driver, reaching agreement
about one or more iterative next steps is often good enough. It’s
also helpful sometimes to break things down into small steps, especially
when you’re dealing with complex or complicated situations.
Objections can be resolved by following the process outlined in Rea-
soned Decision-Making:
Step 1: Come up with a proposal for an amendment
Step 2: Understand the proposed amendment

ebook.2022.0405.2355 89
Step 3: Check if there are any possible objections to the proposed
amendment , e.g. by using hand signs. The possible objections them-
selves are presented in Step 4.
If there are no possible objections, proceed to step 6 (Celebrate), other-
wise take one possible objection at a time, and:
Step 4: Hear the reasoning for the possible objection and determine if
the argument put forward has any validity.
Step 5: Integrate any information revealed in the previous step to im-
prove the proposed amendment, then go back to step 3.
Step 6: Celebrate! You’ve agreed on an amendment that resolves the
objection!
Below you’ll find more guidance on how to go through each step. This
process can be repeated until all objections have been resolved. As
with all patterns in S3, your approach to resolving objections can be
adjusted to suit your context.

Step 1: Come up with proposal for an amendment

Come up with a suggestion for how to amend the proposal to resolve the
objection based on information the objection reveals.
There are many ways to come up with an amendment. Below are some
typical options you can use. We recommend you use them in the order
they are presented: if the first option does not work, go to the next
one, and so on. Once you get more familiar with the process you’ll be
able to discern in the moment which option is more suitable.
1. Ask the person raising the objection: “Do you have a suggestion
for how to amend this proposal to resolve this objection?”
2. Ask the group “Does anyone have a suggestion for how to amend
this proposal to resolve this objection?” and choose one person to
present their suggestion.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 90
 Figure 1.6.: Process for resolving an objection

ebook.2022.0405.2355 91
 3. In case it’s difficult to immediately come up with an amendment,
invite a timeboxed dialogue to share ideas, with the purpose of
coming up with an amendment from there.
As with any proposal, an amendment suggestion gives you a starting
point that can then be refined through inviting and resolving objec-
tions. (see Step 4:Test One Argument Qualifies as Objection)
It’s often helpful to repeat or summarise the amendment and write it
down for everyone to see.

Step 2: Understand amendment

Ensure everyone understands the amendment being proposed.

Facilitator asks: Any questions to understand the proposed amend-
ment?
Tips for everyone:
• Keep your questions and answers brief and to the point.
• Avoid getting into discussions or expressing opinions about the
validity of the amendment at this stage. The point of this step is
simply to ensure the suggested amendment is clear.
• Add relevant clarifications to the written amendment.

Step 3: Check for Possible Objections

People consider the proposed amendment and then indicate if they have
possible objections or concerns.
This step is simply about identifying who has possible objections or
concerns. Arguments are heard in the next step.
Facilitator asks: Are there any possible objections, or concerns to this
amendment? (note that the subject here is the amendment, not the
whole proposal!)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 92
Many groups use hand signs as a way to indicate quickly and clearly if
anyone has any possible objections.
• In case there are possible objections to the suggested amendment,
go on to the next step, Test One Argument Qualifies as Objec-
tion(link).
• If no one indicates having any possible objections, go to Step 6:
Celebrate, because you’ve agreed on the amendment.

Step 4: Test One Argument Qualifies as Objection

Please refer to Test Arguments Qualify as Objections

• If the argument qualifies, continue to Step 5 (Resolve one Objec-
tion)
• If the argument doesn’t qualify, go back to Step 3 to check if
there are any further possible objections to the proposed amend-
ment.

Step 5: Resolve one Objection

Repeat the process: use the Resolve Objection pattern to resolve one
objection to the amendment.
Come up with an amendment to the current amendment suggestion!
Be aware that a proposed amendment might include the suggestion to
entirely replace the current amendment with a different one instead.
As you can see, the Resolve Objections pattern can be used recursively.
Below you will find an illustration that shows how this works.

Step 6: Celebrate!

You’ve agreed on an amendment that resolves the objection! Before

moving on, remember to update your original proposal to integrate the
amendment you’ve agreed on.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 93
 Figure 1.7.: Recursive application of the Resolve Objection pattern

1.7. Evaluate And Evolve Agreements

Continuously evolve the body of agreements, and eliminate

waste.
Regular review of agreements is an essential practice for a learning or-
ganization:
• adapt agreements to suit changing context
• integrate learning to make them more effective
Ensure all agreements have an appropriate review date.
Evaluating agreements can be as simple as checking that an agreement
is still relevant, and there is no objection to keeping it as it is.
Agreements are often reviewed in Governance Meetings, however some-
times it’s more effective to schedule a dedicated session.
Adjust review frequency as necessary, and review early if required.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 94
 Figure 1.8.: Experiment, evaluate, evolve

ebook.2022.0405.2355 95
Elements of this pattern can also be used by individuals to evaluate
decisions they make.

Short Format

• How has this agreement helped us?

• Is there any reason to drop this agreement?
• How can this agreement be improved?
• Agree on a next review date.

Long Format

Figure 1.9.: A long format for evaluating and evolving agreements

ebook.2022.0405.2355 96
Preparation:
• Schedule the review.
• Ensure all necessary information is available.
Follow-up:
• Agree on the next review date.
• Document decisions and tasks, and share with relevant people.
• Consider effects on any related agreements.

1.8. Co-Create Proposals

Bring people together to co-create proposals in response to

organizational drivers: tap collective intelligence, build sense
of ownership and increase engagement and accountability.
There are many ways to co-create proposals. They typically follow a
similar pattern:
1. Agree on the driver (or problem /opportunity /need)
2. Explore the topic and understand constraints
3. Generate ideas
4. Design a proposal (often done by a smaller group)
One way to co-create proposals is to use S3’s Proposal Forming pat-
tern.
For inspiration for steps 2 and 3, look to classic group facilitation tech-
niques or design thinking activities.
Besides in a face-to-face workshop, you can adapt this process for on-
line meetings. You can even use it asynchronously (and over an ex-
tended period of time) to include many people.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 97
 Figure 1.10.: A template for proposals

ebook.2022.0405.2355 98
1.9. Proposal Forming

A (facilitated) group process for co-creating a response to a

driver.
• draws on the collective intelligence and diversity of perspective
within a group
• involves people in co-creating agreements
• fosters accountability and sense of ownership
Proposal Forming may also be used by an individual.

Proposal Forming Steps

Consent to driver: Briefly present the driver. Is this driver relevant

for us to respond to? Are there any essential amendments to what has
been presented?
Deepen shared understanding of driver: invite essential questions
to understand the driver in more detail.
Collect considerations phrased as questions relating to possible solu-
tions. Questions either reveal constraints (information gathering ques-
tions) or possibilities (generative questions).
Answer any information gathering questions if possible.
Prioritize considerations.
Gather ideas as possible ingredients for a proposal.
Design a proposal for addressing the driver considering the cre-
ative ideas and information gathered so far. This is usually done by a
smaller group of “tuners”.

Choosing Tuners

Consider:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 99
 • who should be there?
• who wants to be there?
• who else may have a valuable contribution to make?
• consider expertise, outside view, and inspiration
Between two and three tuners is usually appropriate. Check for any
objections to the proposed tuner(s).

1.10. Reasoned Decision-Making

Engage in productive dialogue by investigating different per-

spectives and the knowledge of participants, to reach agree-
ment on what is considered viable, relevant, valid or empiri-
cally true.
There are many paths people can follow to arrive at a decision with
others (majority, consensus, authoritative, etc), but for any approach
that uses reason as a basis for that agreement, they typically follow a
similar pattern of Reasoned Decision-Making.
Reasoned Decision-Making lays out the process that groups take when
applying reason to check whether a proposal, existing agreement or
amendment is good enough, or if a particular argument is relevant,
valid or empirically true.

The steps of the process

Step 1: Present the subject for investigation (this could be an argu-

ment, or a proposal for how to proceed).
Step 2: Understand the subject (e.g. through clarifying questions).
Step 3: Check if anyone disagrees with the subject (meaning they
question the viability of the proposal or the validity of the argument),
e.g. by using hand signs. Any disagreements are explained in Step 4. If

ebook.2022.0405.2355 100
 Figure 1.11.: Proposal forming process

ebook.2022.0405.2355 101
 Figure 1.12.: Reasoned Decision-Making

there are no disagreements, proceed to step 6 (Celebrate), otherwise

take one disagreement at a time and:
Step 4: Dispute: Hear the reasoning for the disagreement and deter-
mine if the argument put forward has any validity.
Step 5: Integrate any information revealed in the previous step to
improve the subject, then go back to step 3.
Step 6: Celebrate reaching agreement.
How people undergo each of these steps varies and depends a lot on
culture, context, preference, the number of people involved, and on
whether they are communicating asynchronously or meeting face-to-
face.

Mapping Reasoned Decision-Making to other patterns in S3

Reasoned Decision-Making is reflected in all of the S3 process patterns

that support groups to reach agreement. Understanding this meta-
pattern helps people to more effectively apply them:
• Consent Decision-Making, for testing if a proposal or existing
agreement is good enough and safe enough. And, within this, two
nested patterns:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 102
 • Test Arguments Qualify as Objections, for testing if arguments
qualify as objections and only acting on those that do.
• Resolve Objections, for using the information revealed by objec-
tions to make and evolve agreements.
Each of the three processes focuses on the investigation of a different
subject:
• In Consent Decision-Making the subject is a proposal.
• In Test Argument Qualifies as Objection the subject is an argu-
ment that indicates a possible objection.
• In Resolving Objections - the subject is a proposed amend-
ment.

Figure 1.13.: Table: Mapping the steps of RDM to the other S3

decision-making processes

ebook.2022.0405.2355 103
1.11. Role Selection

A group process for selecting a person for a role on the

strength of the reason.
Instead of simply assigning people for roles, or making a choice based
only on majority, use the role selection process to:
• tap collective intelligence by hearing and deliberating on reasons
for nominations
• increase ownership over the decision
• ensure support for the role keeper by those affected.
A prerequisite to the selection process is a clear description of the role’s
domain.

Role Selection - Steps

1. Present Role Description: If possible, send out the role’s do-

main description in advance.
2. Record Nominations: Participants write their nomination on a
slip of paper. People can nominate themselves, another, or pass.
3. Reasons for Nominations: Each person shares who they have
nominated and why.
4. Information Gathering: Participants share or request any in-
formation that might support the group in making an appropriate
selection.
5. Nomination Changes: Check if anyone wants to change their
nomination in light of reasons and information shared so far, and
hear the reasons for each change.
6. Propose a nominee for the role: The facilitator guides the pro-
cess to identify a suitable nominee on the strength of the reasons
heard, e.g. by:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 104
 Figure 1.14.: Role selection process

ebook.2022.0405.2355 105
 • proposing a nominee themselves or asking a group member
• inviting (some) nominees to agree who should be proposed
• inviting group dialogue to help reveal the strongest nominee
7. Check for Objections: Ask participants (including the pro-
posed nominee) to simultaneously signal whether or not they
have an objection.
8. Address and Resolve Objections, beginning with any from
the proposed nominee. Objections may be resolved in many ways,
including amending the role’s domain description or by nominat-
ing someone else. When all objections are resolved, check with
the (final) nominee again if they accept the role.
9. Celebrate: Acknowledge reaching agreement and thank the per-
son who will now keep the role.
To avoid influencing others, abstain from expressing personal interest
or opinions before a selection takes place.
Sometimes a role selection reveals a lack of capacity, relevant experi-
ence, qualities or skill. A group will then need to consider outside can-
didates, reconsider priorities or find an alternative way to account for
the domain.
This pattern can also be used in any situation where there is a need to
choose between a variety of options.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 106
2. Evolving Organizations

2.1. Clarify and Develop Domains

Explicitly clarify, and then regularly evaluate and develop a
domain’s design based on learning, to enable those with re-
sponsibility for the domain to account for it as effectively as
possible.
A clear understanding of people’s area of responsibility and autonomy
enables greater efficiency, effective collaboration, and agility throughout
an organization.
To make better use of their limited time, energy, and resources, peo-
ple in organizations distribute work between them by creating roles or
forming teams, units, or departments. In the process they are explicitly
or implicitly designing domains - distinct areas of responsibility and
autonomy.
Any role or team’s purpose is to contribute towards the overall purpose
of the organization by taking care of a specific organizational need. In-
adequately defined domains typically lead to stakeholders having differ-
ent assumptions about areas of responsibility and autonomy. As a con-
sequence, both collaboration and distribution of work suffers because of
missed dependencies, double work, or work not done at all.
Clarifying domains makes the contract between delegator and dele-
gatee(s) explicit, which enables everyone to learn about what works
and what doesn’t, because everyone understands who is responsible for
what. A clear domain description with a reasonable amount of detail is
a necessary prerequisite for people to successfully evaluate and continu-
ously improve their work.

107
A simple way for supporting stakeholders in developing shared under-
standing about the various aspects of a domain is by creating a do-
main description that contains information about:
• Primary Driver (and/or Purpose)
• Key Responsibilities
• Dependencies
• External Constraints
• Key Challenges
• Key Deliverables
• Competencies, Qualities and Skills
• Key Resources
• Delegator Responsibilities
• Key Metrics
• Evaluation
On the S3 Canvas microsite1 you can find a variety of templates you
can use for (co-)creating and documenting domain descriptions.
Consider designing domains with the minimal constraints necessary
and always choose constraints that enable people to maximally create
value.
The delegatee(s) may do whatever they think will help them achieve
their purpose, unless it is outside the domain of the organization, ex-
plicitly forbidden, they violate somebody else’s (explicit) domain, or
impede other people’s contribution to the organization in some other
way. Things that are forbidden may include explicit constraints laid
out in the domain description, any other agreements the delegatee(s)
needs to keep, or legal and regulatory requirements.

1
http://s3canvas.sociocracy30.org/s3-delegation-canvas.html

ebook.2022.0405.2355 108
When to clarify domains

Consider clarifying domains whenever you identify that stakeholders

have differing assumptions about the domain of an existing role, posi-
tion, team, department, or unit, or even about the domain of the orga-
nization as a whole.
As a delegator, clarify any new domains that you intend to delegate.
When retrospectively clarifying domains that have already been dele-
gated to people, a delegator can gain valuable insights by inviting the
delegatee(s) to describe the domain from their perspective first.

Regularly evaluate and evolve domains

People’s understanding of the organization is limited and the environ-

ment is always changing. Therefore it is essential that delegator, dele-
gatee(s) and other relevant stakeholders regularly take the time to eval-
uate and evolve both the design of the domain and how people account
for it as their understanding of the domain deepens.
People might do a great job of accounting for a domain in the way it’s
designed, but the design of the domain might be primitive or flawed.
On the other hand, even if the design of a domain is poor in the first
iteration, through this process it will improve over time.

Clarify the domain of the whole organization

All domains in an organization are nested within the overall domain of

the organization, which can be designed deliberately in the early stages
of the organization, or clarified retrospectively. An organization’s do-
main needs to enable the members of the organization to effectively
fulfill its purpose and typically needs to be evolved over time.
Consider explicitly clarifying the organization’s overall domain if you
discover that key stakeholders have differing understanding about it, or

ebook.2022.0405.2355 109
when changes to that domain need to be made. In order to do this it’s
necessary to identify the overall delegator of the organization.
An organization’s domain should be designed with the customer and
business model in mind, and needs to factor in environmental con-
straints (e.g. legal, economic, market, competition, etc.)
Regularly evaluate the organization’s domain to support those respon-
sible for the organization to quickly learn and adapt.
One way of clarifying an organization’s domain is by filling out an S3
Organization Canvas2 .

Useful aspects to clarify in a domain description

All of the following elements are important to consider when clarifying

a domain. Depending on your situation and where you are in the life-
cycle of the domain, you might be able to describe each of them more
or less clearly. Regularly evaluate, test assumptions and make things
clearer as you learn.

Primary Driver

Explain how the delegatee(s) will contribute to the overall purpose of

the organization, by clarifying the specific organizational need they
(will) take care of.
Describe the main organizational driver the delegatee(s) (will) respond
to, for example using the pattern Describe Organizational Drivers.
Aim for one or two sentences, so that the information is easy to re-
member and process.
Besides the summary, more details about the driver may be kept in the
logbook.

2
http://s3canvas.sociocracy30.org/s3-organization-canvas.html

ebook.2022.0405.2355 110
 Figure 2.1.: Template for a domain description

ebook.2022.0405.2355 111
Key Responsibilities

List all essential work and decision-making being delegated, in a way

that enables measuring success.
Key responsibilities are those responsibilities that stakeholders consider
essential to take care of for the delegatee(s) to successfully account for
the domain.
Describe explicitly why each of these responsibilities matter for the or-
ganization and the value that taking care of them brings to the organi-
zation.
Responsibilities should be specific and measurable, so they can be re-
viewed and developed as required.

Dependencies

Make explicit the essential dependencies between this domain and

other parts of the organization, so that the delegatee(s) can collaborate
on managing those dependencies with the other stakeholders.
Consider:
• Internal and external customers (those who consume the team’s
output)
• Providers of products or services essential to the work of the dele-
gatee(s).
• Shared resources

External Constraints

Describe important constraints to the autonomy and influence of the

delegatee(s).

ebook.2022.0405.2355 112
External constraints might be fixed or negotiable. They may refer to
customer requirements, to the outside world, to other essential stake-
holders in the organization, to overarching responsibilities the delega-
tee(s) may have, or to the preference of the delegator.
Some examples:
• Specific decisions requiring authorization
• Legal, time, or budget constraints
• Audits and or expected reporting
• Strategy of the delegator and the whole organization
• Organizational values

Key Challenges

What are the known or anticipated challenges that the delegatee(s)

might face when accounting for this domain: relating to the outside
world, the rest of the organization and sometimes to a specific delega-
tee?
• risks and vulnerabilities
• variables (e.g. weather)
• uncertainty and complexity
• lack of skills or resources.
Note: there are always some risks that you need to manage. Try to
list at least 3!

Key Deliverables

What does the team or role provide to respond to its primary driver,
the key responsibilities and the key challenges faced?

ebook.2022.0405.2355 113
As a delegator, consider carefully to what degree you will leave the de-
sign of deliverables to the delegatee(s), who can then define deliver-
ables and add them to the domain description later. Letting the del-
egatee(s) lead on the design of deliverables often frees them up to de-
liver value according to their strengths and interest.
Describe each deliverable with a reasonable amount of detail and en-
sure that deliverables are valuable to the stakeholders that receive
them. You can start with a sentence or two about each deliverable but
eventually you might need to describe them in more detail.

Competencies, qualities and skills

What competencies, qualities and skills are required – or at least

preferable – to successfully account for this domain?

Key Resources

Essential resources the delegatee(s) can make use of in accounting for

their domain, e.g. time allocation, budget, privileges, facilities, hard-
ware, software, etc.

Delegator Responsibilities

When delegating a domain to others, the delegator still retains overall

accountability for the domain and often has a valuable contribution to
make toward accounting for that domain.
List the exact responsibilities the delegator takes on in support of the
delegatee(s) accounting for this domain.
Consider:
• Opportunities for learning and development and support offered
to the delegatee(s).

ebook.2022.0405.2355 114
 • Things essential for successfully accounting for the domain that
only the delegator can do.
• Things that make the delegatees’ life easier and are worthwhile
including.
Describe the delegator’s responsibilities in specific and measurable
terms, so that they can be reviewed and developed as required.

Key Metrics

Key Metrics are statistics that serve as critical indicators of progress,

project health or performance. They relate to the primary driver (and/
or purpose), key responsibilities, challenges, deliverables, and delegator
responsibilities defined for this domain.
Key Metrics are monitored and assessed frequently. They are relevant
criteria for evaluating outcomes and success in scheduled evaluations
(see “Monitoring and Evaluation” below).
For each metric, consider the actual numbers that are monitored, as
well as the meaning of those numbers in relation to the domain (tar-
gets, acceptable range, or tolerance).
Aim to define simple and specific metrics that you can take regularly
(preferably daily).

Monitoring and Evaluation

Regularly evaluate the outcome resulting from activity in this domain

and use what you learn to improve creation of value.
In the evaluation, ensure you consider the following aspects:
• The value the delegatee(s) brought to the organization by ac-
counting for the domain.
• The delegatees’ work processes, and their collaboration with each
other, with the delegator, and with the rest of the organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 115
 • How well the delegator takes care of their responsibilities.
• The design of the domain itself (and potentially the design of
other related domains).
• The delegatees’ competencies and skills in relation to the domain.
• The strategy the delegatee(s) follows to account for this domain.
Define:
• A schedule or frequency for evaluations.
• Other helpful evaluation criteria in addition to the key metrics.
• Any other relevant aspects to consider for the evaluation.
• Who should take part in the evaluation.
• A process for evaluation (e.g. Peer Review).
• Consider including a term (for a role).
Make sure to record and monitor when a domain is due review and add
these dates to your logbook.

Additional Information

Consider also including the following information to the domain de-

scription
• Domain Name
• Delegator (name of the circle or role; e.g. R&D, Project Manager,
CEO, etc)
• Delegatee(s) (if they are known at the time)
• Date of latest update to the domain description
• Author’s Names
• Term (for a role)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 116
2.2. Delegate Influence

Distribute the power to influence, to enable people to decide

and act for themselves within defined constraints.
A delegator can support delegatees to deliver value by:
• Clearly defining domains of autonomy and responsibility
• Ensuring there are opportunities for learning and development
• Providing support if required
Adjust constraints incrementally, considering capabilities, reliability
and outcome.
Decentralize as much as possible, and retain as much influence as nec-
essary.

2.3. Clarify and Develop Strategy

A strategy is a high level approach for how people will create

value to successfully account for a domain.
It is usually more effective if a team or role keeper lead in developing
their own strategy.
A strategy often includes a description of the intended outcome of im-
plementing that strategy.
As the delegator shares accountability for domains they delegate, it’s
valuable they review a delegatee’s strategy, to check for potential im-
pediments and suggest ways it could be improved.
A strategy is a shared agreement between delegator(s) and delegatee(s)
that is regularly reviewed and updated as necessary (pivot or persevere)
Strategies are validated and refined through experimentation and learn-
ing.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 117
Figure 2.2.: Strategies are validated and refined through experimenta-
tion and learning.

2.4. Align Flow

In support of continuous flow of value, move decision-making

close to where value is created, and align the flow of informa-
tion accordingly.
Flow of value: Deliverables traveling through an organization towards
customers or other stakeholders.
Achieve and maintain alignment of flow through the continuous evolu-
tion of an organization’s body of agreements:
• ensure all decisions affecting the flow of value actually support
the flow of value
• enable people with relevant skills and knowledge to influence deci-
sions
• make available any helpful information

ebook.2022.0405.2355 118
 • aim for shorter feedback loops to amplify learning.
When decision-making is conducted close to where value is created,
and the flow of information supports the continuous and steady flow of
value, the potential for accumulation of waste is reduced.

Figure 2.3.: Aligning the flow of information to support the flow of

value

2.5. Create a Pull-System For Organizational

Change

Create an environment that invites and enables members of

the organization to drive change.
Change things when there is value in doing so:
• Bring in patterns that help to solve current and important prob-
lems.
• Don’t break what’s already working!
• Meet everyone where they are …
• … and support everyone to make necessary changes at a manage-
able pace.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 119
2.6. Driver Mapping

A workshop format for large groups to co-create and organize

themselves in response to a complex situation of significant
scope and scale.
During the workshop stakeholders take full ownership of the process
from start to finish, as they progress quickly from concept to fully func-
tioning collaboration.
Identify relevant stakeholders, map out related requirements and use
them to identify work items and decisions that need to be made, dis-
tribute work and define an initial structure for collaboration.
You can use Driver Mapping to:
• organize start-ups,
• kick-off projects,
• tackle major impediments or opportunities,
• implement strategy
• develop organizational structure to better enable the flow of
value.
The outcome of a driver mapping workshop is typically:
• a distribution of work, categorized in a number of domains, cen-
tered around the needs of stakeholders.
• a bespoke organizational structure that brings it all together, in-
cluding interlinking domains for managing dependencies.
• a first draft of prioritized governance and operations backlogs for
each identified subdomain.
• delegation of influence and the distribution of people to the sub-
domains through self-selection and nomination.
Although Driver Mapping is often used for identifying and defining new
domains, there are also applications for identifying and distributing

ebook.2022.0405.2355 120
governance and operational drivers among existing domains in an orga-
nization, e.g. when an initiative will be dealt with by existing teams in
an organization, or if a group feels they’re stuck in their current struc-
ture and are looking for inspiration for how to incrementally adapt it.
The group can decide if they would map to existing domains and figure
out which new ones they’d need to create, or even create a new struc-
ture from scratch.
In a small team or circle (max. 6–8 people), when it’s not a priority
to distribute work, the team might only use steps 1–5, to understand
the scope and fill the operations and governance backlog, and then use
proposal forming or some other approach for identifying strategy and/
or next steps.
In preparation:
• Invite people that can make a relevant contribution to this
project. Send out the agenda for the workshop ahead of time.
• Send out the primary driver you’ll work with, and in case of an
existing domain, the domain description for the project/initiative
in advance so people can familiarize themselves with it. Aim to
resolve any objections before the workshop.
• Attendees may already prepare by thinking through and record-
ing ideas of actors and relating needs.
• Prepare a poster with the domain description to present in the
first step. You will also need A5 and rectangular sticky notes,
pens and a wide wall to work.

The Driver Mapping Process:

These are the steps to follow:

1. Why are we here?

Present and consent to the primary driver

ebook.2022.0405.2355 121
 Figure 2.4.: Driver Mapping: Process

ebook.2022.0405.2355 122
 • Present the primary driver to the group
• Consent to the driver – Is this a clear enough description of the
driver? Is it relevant for us to respond to?
• Clarify any existing constraints from the delegator, e.g. bud-
get, due date, expectations, etc. In the case of an existing do-
main, present the domain description.Invite further questions
that help deepen understanding about what’s happening and
what’s needed.
• Make explicit the level of commitment expected from the partici-
pants. E.g. people are expected to be here for the duration of the
workshop only, or for the duration of the initiative, etc.
• Record any relevant information that comes up.

2. Who will be impacted?

Who will be impacted as we respond to the primary driver? Consider

who can help /stand in the way /benefit /lose or be harmed.
• List actors on sticky notes and display them on a board
• Focus on actual people that will be impacted by this initiative
(groups or individuals), and avoid making assumptions about fu-
ture roles (such as Project Manager) or other domains (e.g. Mar-
keting) at this stage.

3. What is needed?

Consider the various actors and describe what is needed: what do they
need in context of the primary driver, and what do we need from them?
• Write each suggestion on a separate sticky note (need card)
• Describe the need as well as the anticipated impact of responding
to that need
• Use the format “We/they need … so that …”

ebook.2022.0405.2355 123
 • Add the name of the actor in the top left corner of the card
• Add your name in the top right corner of the card

Figure 2.5.: Driver Mapping: A Need Card

4. Identify experience and expertise

Identify who has experience or expertise in responding to these needs,

so that later, when people respond to a specific need, they know who
might have valuable input.
• Take time to familiarize yourself with the various need cards.
• Add your name to those need cards you have experience with,
or ideas how to address, so that later in the process people can
consult with you if helpful.
• Consider adding names of people who are not present if you think
they would have a valuable contribution to make.
• Write the name(s) of these people at the bottom of the need card.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 124
 • Adding your name to a card in this step, doesn’t mean you’re
taking responsibility for the need, only that you’re able and will-
ing to contribute to finding a solution if that’s helpful later.

5. Identify Domains

Cluster actors and/or needs according to relevance, into coherent do-

mains as a starting point for sorting and prioritizing needs. Consider
how to optimize end-to-end delivery of value to the various actors that
you identified in step 2.
Ways to identify domains:
• Cluster groups of similar actors (actor-centric)
• Cluster groups of similar needs (needs-centric)
• A combination of both (of the above) is common
Consider this step complete, as soon as you’ve agreed on a first iter-
ation of a meaningful distribution of work. Remember, you can make
changes to the domains you defined at any time (later during the work-
shop or afterward), so you only need to aim for something that’s good
enough to start.
As a facilitator, gently support the group in self-organizing, and be
mindful of people dropping out of the conversation. This process often
includes a phase that appears chaotic to some participants, which might
make them feel uncomfortable. To test if a result is achieved, ask for
objections to the domains being good enough for now.

6. Populate & define Domains

People organize into smaller teams around the different domains, then
define the domain and give it a name.
• Form small team around the domains according to experience
and interest

ebook.2022.0405.2355 125
 • Add at least 1 or 2 people with expertise first. Use the informa-
tion on the cards,
• Check all domains are sufficiently accounted for
• In each group:
– agree on a name for the domain.
– define the primary driver for the domain (and draft a brief
domain description if helpful).
• Finally, have each group briefly present their domain, and during
each report look out for dependencies and any overlap of these
domains.
In this phase some people might wander between domains until they
find one they feel they can contribute to.

7. Refine the Backlogs

Organize the work that lies ahead in each domain, ensure things are
prioritized and described clearly.
• For each domain, copy the template below to a flip chart
• Sort all remaining needs into the two backlogs on the flip chart:
– operations backlog: needs that can be acted on
– governance backlog: needs that would benefit from or neces-
sitate a decision
• Combine and rephrase cards as necessary, so that description on
each card is clear. Consult the author of the card when in doubt.
• Prioritize the cards in each board.
• Archive any “needs” cards that appear superfluous.
• Consider the domain and describe and prioritize other needs that
may not have been identified.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 126
 • Pass on cards that appear to be the accountability of another do-
main to address.
• Put aside cards relating to multiple domains. You can deal with
them in Step 8.
As a facilitator of the driver mapping process, provide a space to collect
cards concerning multiple domains so that they can be addressed later.
Regularly pause to share reports between the various domains. Note:
Some domains might dissolve, change or merge with others.

Figure 2.6.: Driver Mapping: A template for domains

ebook.2022.0405.2355 127
8. Connect Domains

Create structure to manage dependencies and deal with matters that ex-
tend beyond the scope of one domain or concern the wider organization
• For a new organization or project, consider Delegate Circles, _
Service Circles_ or Double-linking between domains.
• For an existing organization, also consider connecting to existing
domains in the organization.

9. What else?

Take a moment to check if anything’s missing.

What else do we need to consider …
• … to run safely?
• … to address the primary driver?

10. Celebrate!

Take a moment to celebrate your achievements in getting your organi-

zation or initiative started!

2.7. Open Systems

Intentionally communicate with and learn from others outside
of your system.
Individuals, teams and entire organizations can acknowledge interde-
pendence and intentionally invite people from outside their system
to bring in knowledge, experience and influence to assist with
decision-making and support collective learning.
• External experts can offer an outside perspective and bring
knowledge, understanding and skills

ebook.2022.0405.2355 128
 • Representatives of affected parties can inform and influence
decision-making in ways that benefit overall objectives (see _In-
volve Those Affected _)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 129
3. Peer Development

3.1. Ask For Help

A simple protocol for learning, skill sharing, and building con-

nections, with respect for people’s agency.
Ask someone, “would you be willing to help me with …?” The person
asked accepts or declines with a simple “yes” or “no”.
• if the request is declined, the person asking accepts the answer
without negotiation or inquiry
• if the request is unclear, inquire for more information
• if you accept a request for help, support your peer in the best
way you can

3.2. Peer Feedback

Invite any member of your organization to give you some con-

structive feedback on your performance in a role or in a team,
about your general participation and contribution, or about
any other area you wish to develop.
Before the invitation, consider who might be able and willing to pro-
vide the feedback you seek, and decide on an appropriate duration – 15
or 30 minutes is usually enough.
Schedule the session in advance, so that your peer can prepare for your
meeting, and schedule some time for yourself after the session to decide
how you will act on the feedback you received.

130
In the invitation, clarify the topic you want feedback on, and explain
that you are looking for both appreciations and actionable im-
provement suggestions.
During the session itself, consider:
• taking notes to ensure you can remember the details
• repeating back, feedback you receive in your own words to check
for the accuracy of your understanding
• asking clarifying question to better understand feedback if the
intended meaning is unclear for you
Avoid discussing or judging the feedback you receive and remember to
thank your peer for taking the time to give you their feedback.
After the session, review your notes and decide for yourself what you
will do with the feedback you received. It’s your choice if you want to
share your decision with your peer.

3.3. Peer Review

Support each other to learn and grow in the roles and teams
you serve in.
The role keeper — or team — leads the peer review by setting up the
process, and by speaking first in each step.
Ensure you invite people with complementary perspectives to con-
tribute to the review, and a facilitator.
For both appreciations and improvement suggestions, ensure you con-
sider the following aspects:
• The value the delegatee brought to the organization by account-
ing for the domain.
• The role keeper’s or team’s work processes, and their collab-
oration with the delegator and with other relevant stakeholders,
and – in the case of a team - with each other.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 131
 Figure 3.1.: Peer review process

ebook.2022.0405.2355 132
 • How well the delegator takes care of their responsibilities.
• The design of the domain itself (and potentially the design of
other related domains).
• The role keeper’s or team’s competencies and skills in relation
to the domain.
• The strategy the role keeper or team follows to account for this
domain.

Figure 3.2.: Continuous improvement of people’s ability to effectively

keep roles or collaborate in teams

3.4. Development Plan

A plan for how to develop more effective ways of accounting

for a domain, agreed between delegator and delegatee.
The development plan may be created for a person in a role, or for a
team (e.g. a department, circle or open team).
Development may happen in the form of refining the description of the
driver and the domain, making amendments to strategy, or new or up-
dated agreements and specific actions to be taken, either within the
domain of the delegator, or the domain of the delegatee.
A development plan (and any accompanying recommendations for
changes to the descriptions of the domain and the driver) requires
consent from both the delegatee and the delegator.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 133
 Figure 3.3.: A template for development plans

ebook.2022.0405.2355 134
4. Enablers of Co-Creation

4.1. Artful Participation

Commit to doing your best to act and interact in ways that

enable effective collaboration.
“Is my behavior in this moment the greatest contribution I can make to
the effectiveness of this collaboration?”
Participating artfully may include interrupting, objecting or breaking
agreements.
Artful Participation is an individual commitment to:
• actively consider and follow-up on all agreements made, in
the best way possible, given the circumstances
• develop awareness and understanding of individual and col-
lective needs
• grow the necessary skills
• support others to participate artfully
• bring impediments and improvement suggestions to the attention
of others if necessary

Benefits Of Artful Participation

Artful participation:
• enables co-creation and evolution of agreements
• helps to grow stronger teams

135
 • builds self-accountability, integrity and trust
• generates a culture of mutual support and close collaboration
• is more powerful when embraced by many

Figure 4.1.: Balance autonomy and collaboration through artful partici-

pation

Artful Participation: Self-Assessment

• How can I support myself and others to participate more artfully?

• Where are my interactions with others unhelpful or ineffective?
• Which agreements do I find hard to keep? What can I do to ad-
dress this?
• What skills can I develop, that would support me to participate
more artfully?
• What would artful participation mean in relation to:
– my daily activities?
– collaboration and interaction with others?
– the organization?
– our customers or clients?
– the wider environment?

ebook.2022.0405.2355 136
4.2. Adopt The Seven Principles

Align collaboration with the Seven Principles.

Adopting the Seven Principles reduces the number of explicit agree-
ments required, and guides adaptation of S3 patterns to suit the orga-
nization’s context.
An organization’s values need to embrace the Seven Principles.

Figure 4.2.: The Seven Principles

4.3. Agree On Values

Intentionally evolve the culture in your organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 137
Figure 4.3.: An organization’s values need to embrace the Seven Princi-
ples

ebook.2022.0405.2355 138
Values are valued principles that guide behavior. Values define scope
for action and ethical constraints.
• each member brings their own values to an organization based on
personal experiences and beliefs
• a team or organization may choose to collectively adopt val-
ues to guide their collaboration
Values offer guidance to determine appropriate action, even in the ab-
sence of explicit agreements.
Collectively adopting a set of values supports the effectiveness of an
organization:
• reduces potential for misunderstanding
• helps to align decision-making and action
• attracts new members, partners and customers who are
aligned with the organization
Chosen values are an agreement that benefits from regular review.

4.4. Involve Those Affected

Involve people in making decisions that affect them, to main-

tain equivalence and accountability, and to increase the
amount of information available on the subject.
For larger groups:
• facilitate a process in several stages and create smaller groups
who select delegates
• use an online tool and conduct an asynchronous, timeboxed and
staged process
Consider including those affected in reviewing and evolving decisions,
too.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 139
 Figure 4.4.: Chosen values define constraints for collaboration

ebook.2022.0405.2355 140
4.5. Breaking Agreements

Break agreements when you are certain the benefit for the or-
ganization outweighs the cost of waiting to amend that agree-
ment first, and take responsibility for any consequences.
Breaking agreements is sometimes necessary but may come at a cost
to the community.
Be accountable:
• clean up disturbances
• follow up as soon as possible with those affected
• change the agreement instead of repeatedly breaking it

4.6. Transparent Salary

Create a fair salary formula and make it transparent.

Transparent salary (also referred to as “open salary”) is the practice of
determining each employee’s compensation according to a set of rules
— the salary formula — instead of making compensation subject to
individual negotiation between employer and employee. The salary for-
mula — and often individual compensation as well — is transparent to
all members of an organization, and sometimes to the public.
A transparent salary formula needs to suit an organization’s context,
and to be perceived as fair enough by all stakeholders.
Perception of fairness varies from person to person and according to
context, so creating a salary formula requires developing a shared un-
derstanding of what is considered fair.
When deciding (or agreeing) on a salary formula for an organization or
department, consider:
• what would be a suitable fixed subsistence guarantee

ebook.2022.0405.2355 141
 • how to calculate compensation according to need, investment,
productivity, or merit
• how to distribute the organization’s profit and cover for losses in
line with expectations and needs of the various stakeholders
Decide how to handle remuneration for changing roles and develop a
strategy for how to transition towards new contracts and compensation
agreements.

Figure 4.5.: Two ways of opening salaries

4.7. Contract For Successful Collaboration

Support successful collaboration from the start and build

trust between parties by co-creating mutually beneficial and
legally robust contracts.
A contract is a body of promises that two or more parties agree to
make legally binding, i.e if those promises are violated, the injured

ebook.2022.0405.2355 142
party gains access to legal (or alternative) remedies.
Developing shared understanding about needs and expectations is es-
sential for successful collaboration.
While negotiating and agreeing on a contract, model the culture of col-
laboration you want to achieve, and build a positive relationship with
the other parties involved.
This pattern refers to contracts relating related to collaboration around
any business transaction between an organization and other parties
(e.g. employees, consultants, service providers, shareholders or cus-
tomers). It is especially relevant for contracts that have a significant
influence on the future of an organization or one of its partners, such
as:
• employment contracts and contracts with external contractors or
consultants in support roles (including any agreement that results
in a change of remuneration or working hours)
• contracts governing collaboration with customers, vendors or ser-
vice providers
• shareholder agreements
Note: Many agreements about collaboration within an organization
do not require dedicated contracts, as they are already governed by or
subject to existing contracts.

Success criteria for contract negotiation

When negotiating a contract, ensure:

• shared understanding of the reason for the collaboration, as well
as the intended outcome and important constraints
• all parties understand what is expected of them
• all parties affected by a contract are involved in creating the con-
tract and enter it voluntarily

ebook.2022.0405.2355 143
 • expectations are realistic
• the agreement is beneficial to all parties
• everyone intends to keep to the agreement made
If for any reason one or more of these criteria cannot be fulfilled, it is
probably wise to not proceed.

Co-creating the contract

The way a contract is negotiated can significantly contribute toward

building trust between parties. Approach contracting from the point
of view of making an agreement between partners, not adversaries:
co-create the contract, tailor it to its specific context, and ensure it is
legally robust.
• the contract should include all expectations of the parties in-
volved, each explained with adequate detail
• use clear and simple language that all parties can understand,
and be unambiguous about legal consequences
• if you need to use specific technical or legal terms a party might
be unfamiliar with, explain them in a glossary that is part of the
contract
• consult a lawyer who supports the culture you aspire to and is
competent in the field of business you are negotiating

When Co-Creating a Contract:

• ensure all parties have a delegation that includes representation

for all affected domains (e.g. not only sales, but also development
/production /support, etc)
• explicitly describe the culture you want to develop, with consid-
eration for common ground and any cultural differences between
parties

ebook.2022.0405.2355 144
 • state the reasons for the proposed collaboration, and transparent
about expectations and needs of all parties
• disclose all relevant information (if necessary under an NDA)
• agree first on terms of the relationship and expectations to all
parties, and then consider how you can make them legally robust
• compile a list of specific laws and regulation the contract needs to
comply to
• negotiate in several iterations, allowing time to consider implica-
tions and propose amendments
• keep minutes of each meeting to reduce the potential for miscon-
ceptions

Support The Full Lifecycle Of The Collaboration:

Any contract can be changed at any time, provided all signatories

agree. However, it greatly reduces the potential for conflict later if you
consider the full lifecycle of the collaboration in the contract:
• make provisions for successfully getting started by defining on-
boarding procedures
• have a probationary period, where all parties can try out the col-
laboration, and a clear protocol for how each party can terminate
the contract during the probationary period
• define and build into the contract regular review meetings where
signatories come together to share learning and decide how the
contract might be amended to adapt to changing context
• include procedures for breach of contract
• consider making available alternative means for dispute resolu-
tion, e.g. mediation, conciliation or arbitration
• consider limiting the contract to a fixed term after which the con-
tract expires and can be renewed if required

ebook.2022.0405.2355 145
Culture

Every contract influences the culture of the collaboration it governs,

even when it appears to only describe what needs to be delivered:
• intentionally create the culture of collaboration you want to see
by including expectations on how things should be done
• align the contract to the organizational culture (of all parties)
and to legal requirements
• build contracts that enable and encourage accountability
If you find that standard contracts in your industry are misaligned
with the culture you want to create, build your own repository of tem-
plates for contracts and clauses and consider sharing it with others, so
that you can leverage past experience when creating new contracts.

4.8. Support Role

Apply the role pattern to external contractors.

• clarify and describe the driver for the role
• create a domain description
• if valuable, implement a selection process
• consider limiting the term of the contract, after which point it
can be reviewed and renewed if necessary
• build in regular peer reviews
External contractors consent to take on their role.
See also: Contract For Successful Collaboration

ebook.2022.0405.2355 146
4.9. Bylaws

**Secure S3 principles and patterns in your bylaws as needed to pro-

tect legal integrity and organizational culture
Consider:
• consent and equivalence in decision-making
• selection process for leadership roles
• organizational structure, values and principles
• influence of owners or shareholders
• sharing gains and costs

ebook.2022.0405.2355 147
5. Building Organizations

5.1. Circle

A circle is a self-governing and semi-autonomous team of

equivalent people who collaborate to account for a domain.
A circle:
• may be permanent or temporary
• may be self-organizing
• is responsible for its own development and its body of agreements
• semi-autonomous:
– A circle’s members act within the constraints of their do-
main.
– Each circle can create value autonomously.
• self-governing:
– A circle’s members continuously decide together what to do
to account for their domain, and set constraints on how and
when things will be done.
• equivalence of circle members:
– All members of a circle are equally accountable for gover-
nance of the circle’s domain.

148
Figure 5.1.: All members of a circle are equally accountable for gover-
nance of the circle’s domain

ebook.2022.0405.2355 149
5.2. Role

Delegate responsibility for a domain to individuals.

A role is an area of responsibility (a domain) that is delegated to an
individual (the role keeper), who has autonomy to decide and act
within the constraints of the role’s domain.
The role keeper leads in creating a strategy for how they will account
for their domain. They evolve their strategy in collaboration with the
delegator.
A role is a simple way for an organization (or team) to delegate recur-
ring tasks or a specific area of work and decision-making to one of its
members.
• people can take responsibility for more than one role
• instead of formally setting up a new team, it’s sometimes simpler
to just share one role between several people
• role keepers are selected by consent and for a limited term
• peers support one another to develop in the roles they keep
A role keeper may maintain a governance backlog, and a logbook to
record and help them evolve their approach toward delivering value.
Note: In S3, guidelines, processes or protocols created by individuals
in roles are treated as agreements.

5.3. Linking

Enable the flow of information and influence between two

teams.
A team selects one of its members to represent their interests in the
governance decisions of another team.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 150
 Figure 5.2.: People can take responsibility for more than one role

ebook.2022.0405.2355 151
 Figure 5.3.: One circle linked to another circle

5.4. Double Linking

Enable the two-way flow of information and influence between

two teams.
Two interdependent teams each select one of their members to repre-
sent their interests in the governance decisions of the other team.
Double linking enables equivalence between two teams and can be used
to draw out valuable information in hierarchical structures.

5.5. Representative

Select a team member to participate in the governance

decision-making of another team to enable the flow of infor-
mation and influence.
Representatives (a.k.a. links):
• stand for the interests of one team in another team

ebook.2022.0405.2355 152
 Figure 5.4.: Double linking two circles

• are selected for a limited term

• participate in the governance decision-making of the team
they link with, and can:
– raise items for the agenda
– participate in forming proposals
– raise objections to proposals and existing agreements

5.6. Open Team

Intentionally account for a domain by invitation rather than

assignment, and request that those invited contribute when
they can.
An open team is a group of people who are invited to contribute to the
work and governance done in a domain when they can.
The delegator of the domain creates an invitation that clarifies:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 153
 • the primary driver, key responsibilities and constraints of the
open team’s domain
• who is invited to contribute (the members of the open team)
• constraints relating to the delegator’s participation in the open
team’s governance
Depending on the constraints set by the delegator, contributors may
only organize and do work, or take part in governance as well.
The delegator is accountable for conducting regular reviews to support
effectiveness of work and any decision-making in the open team.

5.7. Helping Team

Bring together a team of equivalent people with the mandate

to execute on a specific set of requirements defined by a dele-
gator.
A helping team:
• is a way for a delegator to expand their capacity
• may be self-organizing, or guided by a coordinator chosen by the
delegator
• is governed by the delegator
• benefits from a clearly defined domain
Members of the helping team:
• can object to the delegator’s decisions that affect them
• can add items to the delegator’s governance backlog
• may be invited to select a representative to participate in the gov-
ernance decision-making of the delegator

ebook.2022.0405.2355 154
 Figure 5.5.: Open Team

ebook.2022.0405.2355 155
 Figure 5.6.: Helping Team

ebook.2022.0405.2355 156
6. Bringing in S3

6.1. Adapt Patterns To Context

Adapt and evolve S3 patterns to suit your specific context.
Ensure that everyone affected:
• understands why changing the pattern is necessary (or helpful)
• is present or represented when deciding how to change it
• uses S3 principles as a guide for adaptation.
Run experiments with adaptations for long enough to learn about the
benefits and any potential pitfalls.
Share valuable adaptations with the S3 community.

6.2. Be The Change

Lead by example.
Behave and act in the ways you would like others to behave and act.

6.3. Invite Change

Clarify the reason for change and invite people to participate.
Inviting rather than imposing change helps reduce resistance and en-
ables people to choose for themselves.
When making the invitation:

157
 Figure 6.1.: Phases of adapting patterns to a specific context

ebook.2022.0405.2355 158
 • be transparent about the reason for the change
• clarify expectations and constraints
• avoid coercion or manipulation
• acknowledge any skepticism and doubts
Include the people involved and affected in regular evaluation of out-
comes.

6.4. Open Space For Change

Invite everyone to create and run experiments for evolving

the organization.
• clarify the driver for change
• schedule regular open space events:
– invite all members to create and run experiments
– define constraints for the experiments that enable develop-
ment of a sociocratic and agile mindset (e.g. S3 principles)
– review and learn from experimentation in the next open
space

6.5. Continuous Improvement Of Work Process

Reveal drivers and establish a metrics-based pull-system for

organizational change through continuously improving and
refining the work process.
• introduce the principle of consent and Navigate via Tension to
evolve work process in a team
• consider selecting a facilitator to guide group processes, and
choosing values to guide behavior

ebook.2022.0405.2355 159
 • initiate a process of continuous improvement, e.g. through Kan-
ban or regular retrospectives
• members of the team pull in S3 patterns as required
• if valuable, iteratively expand the scope of the experiment to
other teams
• intentionally look out for impediments

Waste And Continuous Improvement

Waste is anything unnecessary for — or standing in the way of — a

(more) effective response to a driver.
Waste exists in various forms and on different levels of abstraction
(tasks, processes, organizational structure, mental models etc.)
Establishing a process for the ongoing elimination of waste enables
natural evolution of an organization towards greater effectiveness and
adaptation to changing context.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 160
 Figure 6.2.: Drivers, Value and Waste

ebook.2022.0405.2355 161
7. Defining Agreements

S3 promotes a hypothesis-driven approach to decision-making.

Figure 7.1.: Any agreement or decision can be viewed as an experiment.

162
 Figure 7.2.: The Life-Cycle of an Agreement

7.1. Record Agreements

Record the details of agreements you make, so you can recall

them later, evaluate the outcome and evolve the agreement
over time.
An agreement is an agreed upon guideline, process, protocol or policy
designed to guide the flow of value.
Note: In S3, guidelines, processes or protocols created by individuals
in roles are also treated as agreements.
Keep records of agreements up to date, e.g. in a logbook.

What to record?

Record agreements with adequate detail so that important information

can be recalled later.
At the very least include a summary of the driver, a description of
what’s been agreed, who is responsible for what, evaluation criteria and
a review date.
Depending on the scope and significance of the agreement, consider
including all of the following:
• A title for the agreement
• Description of the driver
• Date of creation (and/or version)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 163
 • Date of expiry or due date (if relevant)
• Review date (or frequency)
• Who is responsible for what?
• A description of the agreement, including:
– Any relevant requirements and expectations
– Action items
– Resources
– Constraints
– Intended outcomes
– Deliverables
– Rationale
• Evaluation criteria (and potentially concerns)
• Appendix (if helpful)
– Background information
– Previous versions of the agreements
– References

7.2. Clarify Intended Outcome

Be explicit about the expected results of agreements, activi-

ties, projects and strategies.
Agree on and record a concise description of the intended outcome.
The intended outcome can be used to define Evaluation Criteria and
metrics for reviewing actual outcome.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 164
 Figure 7.3.: Template for agreements

ebook.2022.0405.2355 165
 Figure 7.4.: Intended Outcome, and Evaluation Criteria

ebook.2022.0405.2355 166
7.3. Describe Deliverables
Clearly describe any deliverables related to an agreement to
support shared understanding of expectations.
A deliverable is a product, service, component or material provided in
response to an organizational driver.
When describing deliverables:
• include the necessary amount of detail
• reference other documents when helpful or necessary
Explicitly describing deliverables can be useful for improving commu-
nication and collaboration within the organization, with customer and
with external partners.
Example: A popular way to describe deliverables in software-
engineering are so-called user stories, which focus on the need of users
in relation to a software system. User stories are developed in dialogue
between a customer (or their representative, the product manager
or “product owner”), and the software developer(s). What is written
down is usually one sentence to remind the team of the user need, and
acceptance criteria, a list of requirements for the new feature, which
the customer will then use in a review meeting to decide whether or
not they accept the new feature as delivered.

7.4. Evaluation Criteria

Develop well-defined evaluation criteria to determine if acting
on an agreement had the desired effect.
• go for simple and unambiguous criteria and document them
(to avoid discussion or unnecessary dialogue when reviewing your
agreements)
• define actionable metrics to continuously track effects and spot
deviations from intended outcome

ebook.2022.0405.2355 167
 • consider adding criteria which make it explicit when the outcome
of an agreement would be considered unsuccessful
• when reviewing an agreement, consider evolving the evalua-
tion criteria based on what you have learned

7.5. Logbook

Maintain a coherent and accessible system that stores all in-

formation required for collaboration.
A logbook is a (digital) system to store all information relevant for run-
ning an organization and its teams. The logbook is accessible to all
members of an organization, and information is kept confidential only
when there is good reason to do so.
Common platforms for logbooks are Wikis (e.g. DokuWiki1 , Medi-
aWiki2 , Confluence3 ), Content Management Systems (e.g. Word-
press4 ), G Suite5 , Evernote6 or even Trello7 .

Logbook Contents

Content relating to the whole organization:

• primary driver, strategy and organizational values
• organizational structure (domains and the connections between
them)
• agreements

1
https://www.dokuwiki.org/
2
https://www.mediawiki.org/
3
https://www.atlassian.com/software/confluence
4
https://wordpress.org/
5
https://gsuite.google.com
6
https://evernote.com/business
7
https://trello.com/

ebook.2022.0405.2355 168
Content relating to a specific team or role:
• the domain description and strategy
• agreements (including delegatees’ domain descriptions, strategies
and development plans)
• backlogs and other information relating to work and governance

7.6. Logbook Keeper

Select a member of your team to be specifically accountable

for keeping up to date records of all information the team re-
quires.
The logbook keeper is accountable for maintaining a team’s logbook
by:
• recording details of agreements, domain descriptions, selections,
evaluation dates, minutes of meetings etc.
• organizing relevant information and improving the system when
valuable
• keeping records up to date
• ensuring accessibility to everyone in the team (and in the wider
organization as agreed)
• attending to all technical aspects of logbook keeping

ebook.2022.0405.2355 169
8. Meeting Formats

8.1. Retrospective

Dedicate time to reflect on past experience, learn, and decide

how to improve work process.
• output: changes to work process, new tasks, on-the-fly agree-
ments, and drivers requiring an agreement
• facilitated meeting (1hr )
• regular intervals (1–4 weeks)
• adapt to situation and context

Five Phases of a Retrospective Meeting

1. Set the stage

2. Gather data
3. Generate insights
4. Decide what to do
5. Close the retrospective
Many different activities for each phase can be found at plans-for-
retrospectives.com1

1
http://www.plans-for-retrospectives.com/

170
 Figure 8.1.: Output of a retrospective

ebook.2022.0405.2355 171
8.2. Governance Meeting

Teams meet at regular intervals to decide what to do to

achieve objectives, and to set constraints on how and when
things will be done.
A governance meeting is usually:
• facilitated
• prepared in advance
• timeboxed for a duration of 90–120 minutes
• scheduled every 2–4 weeks
A typical governance meeting includes:
• opening: check in with each other and attune to the objective of
the meeting
• administrative matters
– check for consent to the last meeting’s minutes
– agree on a date for the next meeting
– check for any last-minute agenda items and for consent to
the agenda
• agenda items
• meeting evaluation: reflect on your interactions, celebrate suc-
cesses and share suggestions for improvement
• closing: check in with each other before you leave the meeting
Typical agenda items include:
• any short reports
• evaluation of existing agreements due review
• selecting people to roles
• new drivers requiring decisions to be made, including:

ebook.2022.0405.2355 172
 Figure 8.2.: Phases of a governance meeting

ebook.2022.0405.2355 173
 – forming proposals
– making agreements
– designing domains and deciding how to account for them
(e.g. new roles, circles, teams or open teams)

8.3. Daily Standup

Meet daily to organize work, facilitate learning and improve

your productivity and effectiveness.
• timeboxed (usually 15 minutes)
• held daily at the same time
• the team gathers around a visible project management board/tool
to:
– organize daily work
– address impediments/blocks
– adapt existing agreements or create new agreements on the
spot

8.4. Planning And Review Meetings

People meet at regular intervals (1–4 weeks) in timeboxed

meetings to plan and review work.
Planning meeting: select and estimate work items for the next itera-
tion.
Review meeting: review completed work items and decide on re-work
and changes for the next iteration.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 174
Figure 8.3.: Daily standup is an essential meeting for self-organizing
teams.

Figure 8.4.: Planning and review meetings

ebook.2022.0405.2355 175
8.5. Coordination Meeting

Meet on a regular basis (usually weekly) for reporting on and

coordinating work across domains.
• facilitate the meeting (timebox dialogue and use rounds where
valuable)
• when useful, compile an agenda before the meeting and share it
with attendees in advance
– include details of any prerequisites that can help attendees
to prepare
– further agenda items may come up when hearing status re-
ports
Agenda items:
• cross domain synchronization and alignment
• prioritization and distribution of work
• responding to impediments

ebook.2022.0405.2355 176
 Figure 8.5.: Phases of a coordination meeting

ebook.2022.0405.2355 177
9. Meeting Practices

9.1. Rounds

In a group meeting, go around the circle giving everyone the

chance to speak in turn.
Rounds are a group facilitation technique to maintain equivalence and
support effective dialogue.
Be clear on the purpose and intended outcome of each round.
Sit in a circle, begin each round with a different person, and change
direction (clockwise or counterclockwise) to bring variation to who
speaks first and last, and to the order of contributions.

9.2. Facilitate Meetings

Choose someone to facilitate a meeting to help the group

maintain focus, keep the meeting on track and draw out the
participant’s creativity and wisdom.
Before each meeting, prepare an agenda of topics, and select a facilita-
tor to:
• hold the space, keep the time and navigate the agenda during the
meeting
• facilitate a suitable activity for each topic
• facilitate an evaluation at the end of the meeting

178
 Figure 9.1.: Rounds

ebook.2022.0405.2355 179
Consider selecting a facilitator for a specific term. Even an inexperi-
enced facilitator can make a positive difference.
See also: Prepare For Meetings, Role Selection

9.3. Prepare For Meetings

Prepare in advance to make meetings more effective.

Some considerations for successfully preparing a meeting:
• clarify and communicate the driver for, and intended outcome of
the meeting
• decide who to invite
• create an agenda
• schedule the meeting enough in advance, so people have time to
prepare
• choose an appropriate duration for the meeting
• be clear who will facilitate the meeting, who will take minutes
and who will take care of any follow-up

Preparing an Agenda

Involve people in preparing and prioritizing an agenda and send it out

in advance
For each agenda item agree on:
• the driver
• the intended outcome
• the process
• the time you want to spend on it
• what people need to do to prepare

ebook.2022.0405.2355 180
Support the Participants’ Preparation

• consider what can be done in advance to prepare for the meeting

• notify people about any expectations and prerequisites
• make any resources available that people may need for prepara-
tion

As a participant

• consider the pattern Artful Participation

• review the agenda and consider how you can contribute to each
item
• bring up objections to an agenda, and if possible resolve them
before the meeting
• review improvement suggestions from the last meeting’s evalua-
tion and consider how you might act on them

9.4. Check In

Help people to become aware of themselves and others, and

to focus, be present and engage.
To check in, briefly disclose something about what’s up for you and
how you are, revealing thoughts, feelings, distractions or needs.
Checking in may take the form of an opening or closing round in a
group meeting, or just a brief exchange in a 1:1 meeting.
You can also call for a group check-in during a meeting, or even choose
to individually check in whenever you think this is valuable for the
group.
In a group check-in, allow people to pass if they choose.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 181
When checking in, in a new setting, people can also say their name and
where they are coming from, as a way to introduce themselves. (Tip:
Avoid talking about function, rank etc unless there is a reason to do
so.)

9.5. Evaluate Meetings

Take time for learning at the end of each meeting or work-
shop.
Reflect on interactions, celebrate successes and share suggestions for
improvement before closing the meeting.
• reserve 5 minutes for 1 hour, and 15 minutes for a full-day work-
shop
• record learning and review it before the next meeting
Short formats you can use:
• more of/less of/start/stop/keep
• positive/critical/suggested improvements

Evaluate Meetings: Long Format

Ask everyone in a round to reflect on any or all of the following topics

in a brief sharing, and report key points you’d like to remember for
next time:
• effectiveness and format
• facilitation and participation
• emotional tone
• appreciations and achievements (I liked …)
• growing edges and improvement suggestions (I wish …)
• wild ideas and radical suggestions (What if …)

ebook.2022.0405.2355 182
 Figure 9.2.: Evaluate meetings right before closing the meeting

ebook.2022.0405.2355 183
9.6. Meeting Host

Select someone to take responsibility for the preparation and

follow-up of meetings, workshops or other events.
A person may take on the role of meeting host for a specific event or
for several events over a period of time.

Responsibilities Of A Meeting Host

Preparation:
• identify goals and deliverables
• prepare and distribute agenda
• identify and invite the participants
• estimate the time required and schedule the meeting/workshop
• book the location (and transportation if required)
• set up the space and provide required materials and information
• ensure selection of a facilitator and a notetaker to record minutes,
if appropriate
After the meeting: clean up location, return keys, tie up all the
loose ends, and ensure minutes are distributed.
See also: Facilitate Meetings, Prepare For Meetings

9.7. Governance Facilitator

Select someone to facilitate governance meetings.

A governance facilitator:
• ensures governance meetings stay on track and are evaluated

ebook.2022.0405.2355 184
 • is (usually) selected by a team from among it members (and for a
specific term)
• familiarizes themselves with the Governance Backlog
• often invites others to facilitate some agenda items
As a governance facilitator, consider learning about and using the fol-
lowing patterns from S3 to handle governance effectively:
• Rounds
• Proposal Forming
• Consent Decision-Making
• Role Selection
• Evaluate Meetings
• Resolve Objections
• Peer Review

9.8. Governance Backlog

A governance backlog is a visible, prioritized list of items

(drivers) that are related to governing a domain and require
attention.
A governance backlog contains:
• matters requiring a decision
• proposals to create and consider
• selecting people for roles
Note: Upcoming reports and agreements due review are usually added
directly to the agenda (rather than the backlog).

ebook.2022.0405.2355 185
Figure 9.3.: The governance facilitator is typically a member of the
team

ebook.2022.0405.2355 186
10. Organizing Work

10.1. Backlog

A backlog (to-do-list) is a list of (often prioritized) uncom-

pleted work items (deliverables), or (drivers) that need to be
addressed.
Consider making backlogs visible, not only to other members of a team,
but also to the wider organization.
Types of backlog include:
• governance backlog
• operations backlog
• sprint backlog
• product backlog
• impediments backlog
Implementation:
• analog backlog: sticky notes on a wall, or index cards, magnets
and whiteboard
• digital backlog: e.g. Google Sheets1 , Trello2 , Kanban Flow3 ,
Jira4 , Asana5
1
https://www.google.com/sheets/about/
2
https://trello.com/
3
https://kanbanflow.com/
4
https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
5
https://asana.com/

187
Each item on a (prioritized) backlog typically contains:
• a short description of a deliverable or a driver
• a unique reference number (or link) for each work item
• (the order of work items)
• dependencies to other work items or projects
• due date (if necessary)
• (optional) a measure for value
• (optional) a measure for investment (often an estimate of time
or complexity)

10.2. Prioritize Backlogs

Order all uncompleted work items with the most important

items first, then pull work items from the top whenever there
is new capacity.
No two items can be of equal importance, meaning it is necessary to
agree on priorities and make tough choices.
A prioritized backlog helps to maintain focus on the most important
items.

10.3. Visualize Work

Maintain a system that allows all stakeholders to review the

state of all work items currently pending, in progress or com-
plete.
• valuable for self-organization and pull-systems
• system must be accessible to everyone affected

ebook.2022.0405.2355 188
 • analog: post-its on a wall, or index cards, magnets and white
board
• digital: Trello6 , Kanbanize7 , Leankit8 , Miro9 , Jira10 , Google
Sheets11 , etc.

Figure 10.1.: Visualization of a simple work process

6
https://trello.com/
7
https://kanbanize.com/
8
https://leankit.com/
9
https://miro.com
10
https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
11
https://www.google.com/sheets/about/

ebook.2022.0405.2355 189
Things to track:

• types of work items (e.g. customer request, project tasks, re-

porting tasks, rework)
• start date (and due date if necessary)
• priorities
• stages of work (e.g. “to do”, “in progress”, “review” and “done”)
• impediments/blocks
• who is working on which items
• agreements and expectations guiding workflow (e.g. definition of
done, policy, quality standards)
• use colors, symbols, highlights etc.

Figure 10.2.: A card representing a work item

ebook.2022.0405.2355 190
10.4. Pull-System For Work

People pull in new work items when they have capacity (in-
stead of having work pushed or assigned to them).
Prioritize pending work items to ensure that important items are
worked on first.
Pulling in work prevents overloading the system, especially when work
in progress (WIP) per person or team is limited.

10.5. Limit Work in Progress

Limit the number of work items in any stage of your work

process.
Work in progress includes:
• the number of items in a backlog
• concurrent projects or tasks for teams or individuals
• products in a portfolio
When an action would exceed an agreed upon limit of work items in
progress, this needs to be brought up with the team before continuing.

10.6. Timebox Activities

Set a time constraint to stay focused, bring consciousness to

the time you have and how you use it.
A timebox is a fixed period of time spent focused on a specific activity
(which is not necessarily finished by the end of the timebox).
• to get value out of the timebox, be clear what you want to
achieve
• agree on the duration of the timebox and visualize time

ebook.2022.0405.2355 191
 • negotiate and agree to extend a timebox before the time is up
• break down longer activities into manageable timeboxes
• consider frequent review of progress
• consider choosing someone (the “time keeper”) to help others stay
conscious of time
You could timebox:
• meetings, calls, dialogue
• tasks
• experiments
• an attempt to solve a problem
• checking emails
• breaks
• a longer stretch of work (a sprint)

10.7. Coordinator

**A person fulfilling the role of a coordinator is accountable for co-

ordinating a domain’s operations and is selected for a limited
term.
The coordinator may be selected by the team itself, or by the delega-
tor.
Several coordinators may collaborate to synchronize work across multi-
ple domains.
Instead of selecting a coordinator, a team may choose to self-organize.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 192
11. Organizational Structure

Organizational structure is the actual arrangement of domains and

their connections. It reflects where power to influence is located, and
the channels through which information and influence flow.
Continuously evolve your organization’s structure to:
• support the continuous flow of value
• enable effective collaboration around dependencies
• ensure information is available to those who need it
• distribute resources and power to influence as required
The basic building blocks for organizational structure are interdepen-
dent, connected domains.
Domains can be linked to form a hierarchy or a heterarchy (a.k.a.
complex adaptive system, or network, where multiple functional struc-
tures can co-exist).
Sociocracy 3.0 describes a variety of structural patterns to grow or-
ganizational structure.
• S3’s structural patterns apply to different layers of abstraction
• different structural patterns serve different drivers
• structural patterns can be adapted and combined as needed
• more patterns are out there and will be discovered

193
11.1. Delegate Circle

Delegate making governance decisions affecting multiple do-

mains to representatives selected by those domains.
To make governance decisions on their behalf, stakeholders send repre-
sentatives to form a delegate circle.
Governance decisions made in a delegate circle are acted upon in the
various domains it serves.
Delegate circles provide a way of steering organizations in alignment
with the flow of value, and bring a diversity of perspectives to gover-
nance decision-making.
A delegate circle may bring in other people (e.g. external experts) to
help with specific decisions, or even as a member of the circle.

11.2. Service Circle

Outsource services required by two or more domains.

A service circle can be populated by members of the domains it serves,
and/or by other people too.

11.3. Peach Organization

Deliver value in complex and competitive environments

through decentralization (of resources and influence) and
direct interaction between those creating value and the
customers they serve.
Teams in the periphery:
• deliver value in direct exchange with the outside world (cus-
tomers, partners, communities, municipalities etc.)
• steward the monetary resources and steer the organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 194
 Figure 11.1.: Delegate Circle

ebook.2022.0405.2355 195
 Figure 11.2.: Service Circle

ebook.2022.0405.2355 196
The center provides internal services to support the organization.
Domains are linked as required to flow information and influence, and
to support collaboration around dependencies.

Figure 11.3.: Peach Organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 197
11.4. Double-Linked Hierarchy

Delegate all authority for making governance decisions to self-

governing circles, double-linked across all levels of the hier-
archy, to transition from an traditional hierarchy towards a
structure more suitable for tapping collective intelligence, en-
suring equivalence and building engagement.
1. Shift governance decision-making from individuals to teams by
forming self-governing circles on all levels of your organization.
2. Each circle’s members select one of their group to represent their
interests and participate in the governance decision-making of the
next higher circle, and vice versa.
A double-linked hierarchy:
• brings equivalence to governance
• maintains the potential for a functional hierarchy (if it enables
the flow of value).
See also: Circle, Double Linking, Representative

11.5. Service Organization

Multi-stakeholder collaboration and alignment towards a

shared driver (or objective).
• improves potential for equivalence between various entities
• increases cross-departmental/organizational alignment
• supports multi-agency collaboration between departments or or-
ganizations with different primary motives, or that are in conflict
• suitable for one-off projects, or ongoing collaboration
Note: a service organization is sometimes referred to as a backbone
organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 198
 Figure 11.4.: A double-linked hierarchy: not your typical hierarchy

ebook.2022.0405.2355 199
 Figure 11.5.: Service Organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 200
11.6. Fractal Organization

Multiple constituents (organizations or projects) with a com-

mon (or similar) primary driver and structure can share
learning across functional domains, align action and make
high level governance decisions (e.g. overall strategy).
Creating a fractal organization can enable a large network to rapidly
respond to changing contexts.
If necessary, the pattern can be repeated to connect multiple fractal
organizations into one.

Figure 11.6.: Fractal Organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 201
Prerequisites

A fractal organization can be formed either by multiple in(ter-

)dependent organizations which share a common (primary) driver,
or by multiple branches, departments, or projects within a larger
organization.
These constituents (i.e. organizations, branches, departments or
projects) need to share at least some — and typically most — func-
tional domains (e.g. accounting, product management, or develop-
ment).

Tiers

A fractal organization has at least three tiers:

• first tier: the constituents (i.e. organizations, branches, depart-
ments or projects)
• second tier: function-specific delegate circles to share learn-
ing and to make and evolve agreements on behalf of function-
specific domains
• third tier: a cross-functional delegate circle to make and
evolve agreements in response to drivers affecting the overall
body of constituents

Forming a Fractal Organization

1. Forming the second tier: In each constituent, the members of

each common (and significant) functional domain, decide who of
them will represent them in a function-specific delegate cir-
cle, where they share knowledge and learning, and contribute
toward making and evolving agreements. Representatives are se-
lected for a limited term (after which a new selection is made).
2. Forming the third tier: second-tier delegate circles each select a
delegate to form the cross-functional delegate circle.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 202
Impact on the organization(s)

Each constituent:
• gains access to a wide array of experience, wisdom and skills to
increase effectiveness and innovation.
• can share resources, infrastructure and experience with other con-
stituents according to capacity and need
The second and third tier:
• can test decisions simultaneously across multiple instances of a
function-specific domain, providing extensive feedback and rapid
learning
• organize, align and steer the whole system while preserving au-
tonomy and agency of the individual constituents

ebook.2022.0405.2355 203
 Part V.

A Common Sense
Framework for
Organizations and Teams

204
 Figure 0.1.: The Common Sense Framework

We’re observing an emerging common sense that is transforming or-

ganizations around the world, inspiring and enabling people to build
successful organizations where BOTH the people and the organization
thrive.
We have distilled the essence of this common sense into a concise
framework for teams and organizations: The Common Sense Frame-
work (CSF) is a tool for sense-making, designed to help people
address the challenges and opportunities they face. It supports building
a shared understanding of the bigger picture, identifying and prioritiz-
ing areas of need within a team and throughout an organization, and
understanding what to focus on next.
We mapped the 10 principles that comprise the framework to the pat-
terns in S3, so that you can use the CSF as a guide for identifying
those patterns that help address your specific needs.
The CSF can be applied in the context of developing individual teams
and the organization as a whole.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 205
1. An Organization Where BOTH
the People and the
Organization can Thrive
See the bigger picture – identify what’s needed – prioritize
where to start.
People face many challenges and opportunities in organizations and
recognize the potential for improving the current state of things, yet
they’re uncertain or unable to agree how and where to start and what
to do to move forward.
They need a simple way to build shared understanding about what is
happening in their organization, and what needs to be done, so that
they can effectively and sustainably respond to the impediments and
opportunities they face.
The Common Sense Framework (CSF) lays out the big picture of
what to consider to grow and maintain organizations where BOTH the
people and the organization can thrive, and suggests specific practices
and tools that can help you to get there.
Through 10 essential principles that apply equally to individual
teams, and the organization as a whole, evolve organizations that are:
• focused on value – people’s efforts are directed toward creat-
ing value for the organization, its members, customers, and other
stakeholders.
• productive – the organization is efficient in identifying, develop-
ing and delivering the necessary products and services necessary
to achieve its purpose.

206
 • adaptive – people are able to effectively identify and respond to
organizational needs and changing contexts (both short term and
long-term).
• resilient – the organization and its members are able to with-
stand adversity and uncertainty, if needed.
• reciprocal – the organization and its members share a relation-
ship of mutual reciprocity where the organization is committed to
the development, wellbeing and success of its members, and vice
versa.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 207
2. Ten Principles for Evolving
Teams and Organizations

Principle 1 – Clarify Purpose: Ensure that everyone understands

who the organization or team is serving, why and to what end, so that
everyone is able to focus and unite their efforts on achieving that pur-
pose.
Principle 2 – Develop Strategy: Develop a strategy to guide value
creation, so that everyone shares a common direction, and strategy is
adapted as necessary to achieve the purpose.
Principle 3 – Focus on Value: Focus your daily work on value de-
livery, so that the stuff that needs doing to achieve your purpose is
done.
Principle 4 – Sense & Respond: Identify, prioritize and respond
to impediments and opportunities, so that you can adapt or pivot as
necessary and improve where you can.
Principle 5 – Run Experiments: Run experiments to address com-
plex challenges, so that you learn how to move closer to where you want
to be.
Principle 6 – Enable Autonomy: Free individuals and teams up to
create value as autonomously as possible, so that you can deliver value
fast and avoid unnecessary dependencies.
Principle 7 – Collaborate on Dependencies: Co-create and evolve
a coherent system to deal with all dependencies, so that you deliver
value fast when dependencies cannot be avoided.

208
Principle 8 – Invest in Learning: Support everyone in developing
their competence and skill, so that their contribution remains valuable
and the organization can evolve.
Principle 9 – Intentionally Develop Culture: Collaborate on fos-
tering a cooperative culture where everyone can achieve their fuller
potential, so that you build and maintain an engaging and productive
work environment.
Principle 10 – Build Shared Mental Models: Invest in building
shared mental models, so that everyone can engage in meaningful di-
alogue about what’s happening and what needs to be done, and in the
process deepen their understanding of how the organization works, what
it does and why.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 209
3. Two Principles for Orientation

3.1. Principle 1 – Clarify Purpose

Ensure that everyone understands who the organization or

team is serving, why and to what end, so that everyone is
able to focus and unite their efforts on achieving that pur-
pose.
Essential Patterns to help you achieve this:
• Describe Organizational Drivers – Understanding the motive for
acting in response to a specific situation is an essential compo-
nent for understanding, defining and communicating the purpose
of an organization, a team or department.

3.2. Principle 2 – Develop Strategy

Develop a strategy to guide value creation, so that everyone

shares a common direction, and strategy is adapted as neces-
sary to achieve the purpose.
Essential Patterns to help you achieve this:
• Clarify and Develop Domains – A clearly defined area of influ-
ence, activity and decision-making is a prerequisite for defining an
effective strategy for an organization, a team or role.
• Clarify Intended Outcome - Defining the intended outcome of a
strategy is an essential component for monitoring and evaluating
its effectiveness, and adapting things when necessary.

210
Figure 3.1.: Two Principles for Orientation: Clarify Purpose – Develop
Strategy

ebook.2022.0405.2355 211
 • Describe Organizational Drivers – Understanding the motive for
acting in response to a specific situation is an essential compo-
nent for designing an effective strategy for responding to it
• Clarify and Develop Strategy – Stakeholders collaborating on cre-
ating and evolving strategy for an organization, team or role,
helps to support creation of relevant and effective strategy
• Evaluate And Evolve Agreements – Reviewing strategy and evolv-
ing it as necessary over time ensures it remains helpful and rele-
vant to the organization, team or role.
• Evaluation Criteria – Defining criteria for success or failure is
necessary for figuring out whether or not the strategy is effective.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 212
4. Three Principles for Navigation

4.1. Principle 3 – Focus on Value

Focus your daily work on value delivery, so that the stuff that
needs doing to achieve your purpose is done.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Clarify and Develop Domains – Clarifying the area of influence,
activity and decision-making that a team, or person in a role is
responsible for, enables them to understand the value they are
expected to deliver.
• Respond to Organizational Drivers – Understanding what’s neces-
sary to respond to and why, and ensuring those things are taken
care of, maximizes potential for creating value.
• Prioritize Backlogs – When you prioritize your list of work items
by value, it is obvious which ones need to be worked on first.
• Limit Work In Progress – Limiting the number of concurrent
work items for people and teams, helps to maintain a steady flow
of value and encourages collaboration when work is blocked.
• Daily Standup – A Daily Standup provides the space for a team
to organize how they will create value during the day ahead
• Test Arguments Qualify as Objections – When you test each ar-
gument brought forward against a decision for whether or not it
reveals worthwhile improvements or unwanted consequences, you
keep your work focused on value and avoid getting derailed by
unfounded opinions and personal preferences.

213
Figure 4.1.: Three Principles for Navigation: Focus on Value – Sense &
Respond – Run Experiments

ebook.2022.0405.2355 214
4.2. Principle 4 – Sense & Respond
Identify, prioritize and respond to impediments and opportu-
nities, so that you can adapt or pivot as necessary and im-
prove where you can.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Continuous Improvement of Work Process – Getting in the habit
of continuously seeking to improve the work process supports
people’s skill in identifying and acting on opportunities to im-
prove.
• Describe Organizational Drivers – Before responding to a per-
ceived impediment or opportunity, it is essential to understand
the current situation, and why it makes sense for the organization
to respond
• Governance Backlog – Keeping a prioritized list of all impedi-
ments and opportunities that require a governance decision to be
made, keeps outstanding issues visible and clarifies what is most
important to respond to first.
• Navigate via Tension – When everyone in the organization pays
attention for situations that appear different to what is expected
or desired, and brings that information to the attention of those
responsible, you maximize the organization’s potential for identi-
fying impediments and opportunities.
• Respond to Organizational Driver – Responding only to chal-
lenges and opportunities that are valuable for the organization,
maximizes return on investment of limited time, energy and re-
sources.

4.3. Principle 5 – Run Experiments

Run experiments to address complex challenges, so that you
learn how to move closer to where you want to be.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 215
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Describe Organizational Drivers – Building a shared mental
model of the situation you want to address, is essential for suc-
cessfully designing, running and later on, evaluating experiments.
• Clarify Intended Outcome – A clear description of the intended
outcome of an experiment is essential for understanding whether
or not an experiment produced the intended result.
• Evaluation Criteria – Defining clear criteria for determining suc-
cess before the start of an experiment, helps to reveal flaws in its
design and supports effective evaluation of outcomes.
• Consent Decision-Making – An effective group process for viewing
a proposition from a diversity of perspectives and testing whether
or not an experiment is good enough and safe enough to run.
• Evaluate and Evolve Agreements – An experiment needs to be
regularly reviewed to determine what outcomes it achieves, and
as a consequence, potentially adapted or even stopped.
• Limit Work in Progress – Limit the number of concurrent experi-
ments to avoid overwhelm and maintain a steady flow of value.
• Create A Pull-System for Organizational Change – Inviting and
enabling people to run experiments when they discover organiza-
tional needs allows for effective and decentralized adaption of the
organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 216
5. Two Principles for Structure

5.1. Principle 6 – Enable Autonomy

Free individuals and teams up to create value as autonomously

as possible, so that you can deliver value fast and avoid un-
necessary dependencies.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Clarify and Develop Domains – When people understand their
own areas of responsibility, and those of others too, they know
what is expected of them and where they are dependent on oth-
ers.
• Pull-System For Work – People being able to pull in new work
items when they have capacity, eliminates overload and improves
productivity.
• Delegate Influence – Delegating work, together with authority to
make decisions relating to that work, frees people up to create
value and removes unnecessary dependencies.
• Role – Delegating autonomy to an individual to decide and act
within clearly defined constraints, frees individuals up to create
value, and enables those who delegate to retain as much influence
as necessary.
• Circle – Delegating autonomy to a team to organize and govern
themselves within clearly defined constraints, frees the team up
to create value, and enables those who delegate that authority to
retain as much influence as necessary.

217
Figure 5.1.: Two Principles for Structure: Enable Autonomy – Collabo-
rate on Dependencies

ebook.2022.0405.2355 218
 • Clarify and Develop Strategy – A strategy for creating value, de-
veloped by the individual or team and agreed upon by all rele-
vant stakeholders, builds trust and supports autonomy.
• Development Plan; Collaborating with relevant stakeholders on
developing a plan for how to improve, helps a team or individ-
ual in a role develop their skill and competence, and builds trust
among all concerned.
• Align Flow – Moving decision-making close to where value is cre-
ated, while retaining the influence of the relevant stakeholders,
supports the flow of value and eliminates unnecessary dependen-
cies and delays.

5.2. Principle 7 – Collaborate on Dependencies

Co-create and evolve a coherent system to deal with all de-

pendencies, so that you deliver value fast when dependencies
cannot be avoided.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Navigate via Tension – Everyone in the organization paying at-
tention to dependencies maximizes the potential for unmanaged
dependencies to be identified and responded to.
• Clarify and Develop Domains – When people understand their
own areas of responsibility, and those of others too, they also un-
derstand where collaboration on dependencies will be necessary.
• Visualize Work – Visualizing work items and the dependencies
between them, makes it easier to manage dependencies in cooper-
ation with the relevant stakeholders.
• Respond to Organizational Drivers Understanding why a depen-
dency exists in the first place, and ensuring it is taken care of, is
essential for collaborating on managing or resolving dependencies.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 219
 • Involve Those Affected – To address dependencies in an effec-
tive way, it often helps to gather the perspectives of all (relevant)
stakeholders and involve them in the decision-making process.
• Linking – Dependencies between two teams can often be ad-
dressed effectively by sending a Representative to the decision-
making of the other team, to ensure all relevant perspectives are
considered and ownership of decisions is shared.
• Delegate Circle – Delegating the power to make and evolve agree-
ments for how to deal with specific dependencies between teams,
to a circle of representatives, brings together relevant perspectives
and generates ownership among stakeholders.
• Align Flow – Moving decision-making close to where value is cre-
ated, brings together the people necessary for making decisions
in response to specific dependencies and eliminates unnecessary
decision-making bottlenecks.
• Create a Pull-System for Organizational Change – Inviting and
enabling people to make changes to organizational structure,
when doing so provides an effective way for dealing with depen-
dencies they share responsibility for, facilitates the ongoing evolu-
tion of a coherent and effective organization.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 220
6. Three Principles for
Transformation

6.1. Principle 8 – Invest in Learning

Support everyone in developing their competence and skill, so

that their contribution remains valuable and the organization
can evolve.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Navigate via Tension – Everyone in the organization paying at-
tention for situations where growing competence and skills may
be valuable, focuses the learning effort and facilitates continuous
improvement.
• Evaluate Meetings – A brief evaluation at the end of each meeting
or workshop helps people identify their strengths, growing edges
and ways to improve their contribution in the future.
• Peer Review – A team or person in a role regularly inviting rel-
evant stakeholders for a review of their effectiveness, supports
identifying their strengths, growing edges and ways they can im-
prove their contribution in future.
• Development Plan – Collaborating with relevant stakeholders on
a plan for how to develop necessary skills and competence, is an
effective way of focusing the learning efforts of a person in a role,
or for a team.
• Peer Feedback – Inviting feedback from peers, supports people in
understanding their strengths and growing edges, so that they

221
Figure 6.1.: Three Principles for Transformation: Invest in Learning –
Intentionally Develop Culture – Build Shared Mental Mod-
els

ebook.2022.0405.2355 222
 can invest in learning where helpful.

6.2. Principle 9 – Intentionally Develop Culture

Collaborate on fostering a cooperative culture where everyone

can achieve their fuller potential, so that you build and main-
tain an engaging and productive work environment.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Artful Participation – Introducing the concept of Artful Partici-
pation to people, invites them to pay conscious attention to how
they contribute and to make changes when they realize their cur-
rent approach can be improved.
• Adopt the Seven Principles – The seven principles provide guide-
lines for behavior that enable a productive, engaging and coopera-
tive culture.
• Agree on Values – Agreement on fundamental guidelines for be-
havior in the organization, define ethical parameters for action
and facilitate coherence.
• Evaluate and Evolve Agreements – Regular review and intentional
evolution of agreements relating to culture, helps keep them alive
in the consciousness of the people and identify when and how
they can be improved.
• Contract for Successful Collaboration – Co-creating mutually ben-
eficial agreements for collaboration from the start, supports build-
ing and maintaining an engaging and productive working environ-
ment and a culture of trust between parties.
• Create a Pull-System for Organizational Change – Distributing
the responsibility for developing culture to everybody, invites
proactivity in addressing challenges and opportunities as they
arise.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 223
6.3. Principle 10 – Build Shared Mental Models

Invest in building shared mental models, so that everyone can

engage in meaningful dialogue about what’s happening and
what needs to be done, and in the process deepen their un-
derstanding of how the organization works, what it does and
why.
Essential patterns to help you achieve this:
• Navigate via Tension – Looking out for, and addressing situa-
tions that could benefit from building or refining a shared mental
model, helps people to get on the same page and supports pro-
ductive dialogue.
• Clarify and Develop Domains – Explicitly clarifying and docu-
menting areas of responsibility ensures a shared mental model
regarding expectations and responsibilities.
• Clarify Intended Outcome – By first agreeing on the intended
outcome of a proposed activity, project or agreement, people de-
velop shared understanding of where things should be headed and
can then engage in productive dialog about how to get there.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 224
7. Where to Start?

Each principle supports a specific outcome. To determine where to

start in your organization or team, take a look at the outcomes
for each principle (the text after “so that”) and reflect on where your
greatest need lies at the moment. In any case, check that you are
clear enough on your organization’s or team’s purpose and
strategy before you proceed.
In the illustration below you can see that some of the principles are
more closely related than others, which might further inform you of
where to start.
For each principle we included a list of suggestions for things you can
try. These suggestions are taken from the menu of patterns contained
in Sociocracy 3.01 . For now we only added the most essential patterns
that support each principle, in future versions of this framework we will
include even more patterns.

1
http://patterns.sociocracy30.org

225
 Figure 7.1.: Ten Principles for Evolving Teams and Organizations

ebook.2022.0405.2355 226
 Part VI.

Appendix

227
1. Changelog

1.1. Changes 2022–04–05

• added detailed description and new illustrations to Resolve Objec-

tions

1.2. Changes 2022–02–04

• added detailed description of the Consent Decision-Making pro-

cess
• revised text of Reasoned Decision-Making
• updated 20 illustration to align with style of new illustration for
Consent Decision-Making

1.3. Changes 2022–01–27

• added Reasoned Decision-Making

• updated pattern categories:
– new category Evolving Organizations
– renamed Co-Creation and Evolution to Sense-Making and
Decision-Making
– renamed Focused Interactions to Meeting Formats

228
 – renamed Enablers of Collaboration to Enablers of Co-
Creation
– and moved some patterns around
• Aligned spelling of decision-making throughout the guide
• revised summary of Resolve Objections
• revised text of Driver Mapping (step 7)

1.4. Changes 2021–09–22

• fixed a link on the pattern map and added links to the principles
• fixed some typos, minor revisions to the text

1.5. Changes 2021–09–03

• revised text about Objections as well as the definitions of Objec-

tion and Concern

1.6. Changes 2021–08–15

• renamed Open Domain to Open Team

1.7. Changes 2021–06–18

• added a dedicated chapter for each of the Seven Principles

• revised the ten principles of the Common Sense Framework
• updated section about governance in the introduction
– added more text to explain how governance can be dis-
tributed throughout the organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 229
 – more examples for governance decisions
• corrected a few typos
• several small revisions

1.8. Changes 2021–05–15

• Navigate via Tension: added more explanation about passing on

drivers to another domain
• Clarify and Develop Domains: more explanation about refining
the elements of a domain description, more information about
metrics, monitoring and evaluation, added template illustration,

1.9. Changes 2021–03–15

• updated the Seven Principles

1.10. Changes 2021–02–19

• fixed several broken links on the online version

• corrected a few typos

1.11. Changes 2021–02–11

• Driver Mapping: added explanation about applications of the

pattern, and detailed instructions for each step of the format

ebook.2022.0405.2355 230
1.12. Changes 2021–02–06

• Revised glossary definitions for Semi-Autonomy, Self-Organization

and Sociocracy
• Renamed Pattern: Those Affected Decide to Involve Those Af-
fected
• Several small corrections and revisions

1.13. Changes 2021–02–03

• Added the Common Sense Framework to the Practical Guide

• A new structure of the Practical Guide that makes that the rele-
vant parts easier to find:
– What is Sociocracy 3.0
– The Seven Principles
– Key Concepts for Making Sense of Organizations
– The Patterns
– The Common Sense Framework
– Appendix
• Redesigned the website for better usability:
– A new responsive menu that provides direct access to all
patterns and other sections of the guide
– A new homepage that explains what is where
– A new layout for a cleaner experience on desktop and mobile
devices

ebook.2022.0405.2355 231
1.14. Changes 2021–01–12

• Renamed Patterns:
– renamed Clarify Domains to Clarify and Develop Domains
– renamed Develop Strategy to Clarify and Develop Strategy
• Clarify and Develop Domains: revised text, added more details
and explanations about domain descriptions
• Peer Review: added more details about what should be reviewed
• Peer Feedback: revised the text and added more details
• Breaking Agreements: added summary
• added glossary entry for “metric”
• revised glossary entry for “governance”
• Describe Organizational Drivers: revised text
• Introduction:
– added more details to the section about Domains and dele-
gation
– removed illustration in the section about patterns and listed
the pattern groups in the text
• Appendix:
– added a disclaimer
– added more information about the authors

1.15. Changes 2020–05–08

• revised all illustrations for a more consistent style and increased

readability

ebook.2022.0405.2355 232
 • revised introduction: more explanation about patterns and core
concepts
• updated glossary: revised explanation of Delegator, Delegatee,
Role and Pattern, added Role Keeper

1.16. Changes 2020–04–29

• Introduction: Added Objection and Agreement to concepts

• renamed pattern Objection to Test Arguments Qualify as Objec-
tions
• renamed pattern Agreement to Record Agreements
• Test Arguments Qualify as Objections: revised text and updated
illustration
• Record Agreements: revised text, added more details of agree-
ments that might be recorded, updated illustration

1.17. Changes 2019–12–22

• added new introduction text

• added “social technology” to glossary
• website now has separate pages for “Introduction” and “Concepts
and Principles”
• ePub now looks much better

1.18. Changes 2019–11–29

• Principle of Transparency: revised description to clarify that

valuable information needs to be recorded, and then shared with
everyone in the organization

ebook.2022.0405.2355 233
 • Principle of Empiricism: clarified that only those assumptions one
relies on need to be tested

1.19. Changes 2019–06–27

• Objection: further refined definition of objection, and updated the

glossary term for objection accordingly
• replaced “action” with activity in a few places where it made
more sense
• fixed a few typos

1.20. Changes 2019–05–03

• refined glossary terms for agreement, organization and team,

added glossary term for objective
• Principle of Accountability: clarified individual accountability for
work as well as for collaboration
• Contract For Successful Collaboration: revised text
• Describe Deliverables: added User Stories as an example for de-
scribing deliverables
• Double-Linked Hierarchy: revised summary
• Delegate Circle: refined summary
• Objection: refined definition of objection and concern, added illus-
tration for a process to qualify an objection
• Proposal Forming: added missing process illustration
• Role Selection: small amendment to illustration
• Transparent Salary: explained what a salary formula is

ebook.2022.0405.2355 234
1.21. Changes 2019–03–08

General Changes
• expanded the introduction with more information about S3 and
the history of sociocracy that was previously only available on the
main S3 website
• updated section about governance in the introduction
• added captions to all illustrations
• renamed pattern group “Enablers of Co-Creation” to “Enablers of
Collaboration”
• removed slide deck version and improved layout and formatting of
pdf and ePub version
• website version: added clickable pattern map for simpler naviga-
tion, added glossary overlays to many patterns
Glossary:
• added team to glossary (and replaced group with team through-
out the practical guide where applicable)
• updated definition for deliverable
• removed driver statement from text and glossary
• updated definitions for governance, operations, and self-
organization
Illustrations:
• updated templates for domain description and role description
• updated illustrations for Linking and Double-Linking
Changes to Patterns:
• Agreement: description now mentions that any expectations
should be recorded

ebook.2022.0405.2355 235
 • Describe Deliverables: updated summary
• Describe Organizational Drivers: more information on summariz-
ing drivers
• Resolve Objections: added summary and description

1.22. Changes 2018–08–17

General Changes
• added and revised the brief summary for many of the patterns
• removed bullet points in favor of full sentences in many patterns
• lots of small improvements to grammar and language
• included the URL to the web version of the practical guide
Glossary:
• updated: account for (v.), concern, deliverable, governance,
objection, operations, primary driver, principle, role, self-
organization, semi-autonomy, subdriver, values
• added: constituent, coordination, delegation, driver statement,
evolve (v.), flow of value, helping team and open domain
• removed: peer driver
Changes to Introduction
• added the driver for creating Sociocracy 3.0
• The Seven Principles:
– The Principle of Empiricism: removed reference to “falsifica-
tion”
– The Principle of Consent is now explained more clearly as
“Raise, seek-out and resolve objections to decisions and ac-
tions”

ebook.2022.0405.2355 236
 • Governance, Semi-Autonomy and Self-Organization: we refined
the definitions of Governance, Operations, and Self-Organization,
removed any reference to “coordination”, and clarified the distinc-
tion between governance and operations
• Drivers and Domains: we clarified how domains can be under-
stood in relation to organizational drivers
Changes to Patterns:
• Agree on Values: improved description
• Align Flow: improved description and illustration
• Adapt Patterns To Context: improved description
• Agreement: improved description, updated template
• Artful Participation: improved summary
• Clarify Intended Outcome (renamed from Intended Outcome):
improved description
• Consent Decision-Making: improved description, updated illustra-
tion
• Continuous Improvement Of Work Process: improved description
• Contract For Successful Collaboration: renamed the pattern to
a more descriptive name, and explained process of creating con-
tracts, and what needs to be in them
• Coordination Meeting: clarified agenda items, updated illustration
• Delegate Circle: improved description
• Delegate Influence: improved description
• Describe Deliverables: improved description
• Describe Organizational Drivers: made explicit that a driver
statement is typically only 1–2 sentences, revised section about
explaining the need, moved the section about reviewing driver
statements from Respond to Organizational Drivers to this pat-
tern, and added a new illustration that explains how to describe
organizational drivers

ebook.2022.0405.2355 237
 • Double Linking: aligned description to Link
• Double-Linked Hierarchy: explained in more detail what a double-
linked hierarchy is, and how it is created
• Evaluate and Evolve Agreements: rearranged the text so it’s clear
there is a long and a short format
• Evaluation Criteria: suggested clarifying a threshold for success,
and we explained about also evolving evaluation criteria when
evolving agreements
• Facilitate Meetings: improved description
• Fractal Organization: extended and improved description
• Governance Backlog: improved description
• Governance Meeting: improved description, clarified agenda items
• Invite Change: description now focuses on how to invite change
• Linking: aligned description to Double Linking
• Logbook: clarified that there is no difference between logbooks for
groups and logbooks for roles
• Navigate via Tension: improved description, added a new illus-
tration to clarify the distinction between Navigate via Tension,
Describe Organizational Drivers and Respond to Organizational
Drivers
• Objection: clarified the difference between objection and concern,
clarified what qualifies as an objection, and how to qualify objec-
tions in a group context
• Open Domain: improved description and updated illustration
• Open Systems: improved description
• Open Space for Change: renamed from Open S3 Adoption, im-
proved description
• Peach Organization: clarified relationship between periphery and
center

ebook.2022.0405.2355 238
 • Proposal Forming: revised text and illustration to make process
of choosing tuners more clear, updated template for proposal to
align with template for agreement
• Representative: improved description
• Resolve Objections: updated both illustrations
• Respond to Organizational Drivers: improved description, simpli-
fied qualification of organizational drivers
• Role: improved description
• Role Selection: improved description, added description of each
step
• Rounds: improved description
• Transparent Salary: added more details about fairness, and on
how to develop a salary formula
Renamed Patterns:
• Evaluate Agreements to Evaluate and Evolve Agreements
• Intended Outcome to Clarify Intended Outcome
• Open S3 Adoption to Open Space for Change
• Contracting and Accountability to Contract For Successful Collab-
oration
Added Patterns:
• Check In
• Co-create Proposals
• Prepare for Meetings
• Timebox Activities

ebook.2022.0405.2355 239
1.23. Changes 2018–03–21

• renamed pattern Describe Drivers to Describe Organizational

Drivers
• Describe Organizational Drivers: explained four aspects of a
driver: current situation, effect of the situation on the organiza-
tion, need of the organization in relation to this situation, and
impact of attending to need
• added need to glossary

1.24. Changes 2017–11–16

• small corrections
• aligned glossary entries for Circle and Role to pattern text
• Development Plan: clarification of responsibilities
• Role: clarified evolution of strategy

1.25. Changes 2017–11–10

• various small clarifications and corrections

• Circle: clarified relationship between circle and domain
• Role: improved description
• Rounds: improved description
• moved Open Domain, Helping Team and Open Systems to cate-
gory “Building Organizations”
• added several terms to the glossary

ebook.2022.0405.2355 240
1.26. Changes 2017–10–21

• added Liliana David to authors

• dropped the term “framework” (replaced with “practical guide”)
• updated order of patterns
• added an index of all the patterns
• added a glossary
• added acknowledgments
• various small clarifications and corrections to text and illustra-
tions
• updated templates for agreement and development plan
Changes to Introduction
• added “what’s in it for me?”
• added definitions for governance, self-organization, semi-
autonomy, operations to introduction
• clarified domains and their relationship to drivers
• fleshed out core concepts
• made all principles actionable
Changes to Patterns:
• Artful Participation: improved description
• Agreement: clarified that the concept of agreements is applicable
to people in roles
• Clarify Domains: improved description
• Circle: updated definition of “circle”, improved description
• Driver: updated definition of “driver”
• Development Plan: improved description, updated template

ebook.2022.0405.2355 241
 • Develop Strategy: updated definition of “strategy”, improved de-
scription
• Double-Linked Hierarchy: new illustration
• Evaluate Agreements: aligned questions to peer review
• Governance Backlog: improved description
• Logbook: added details about governance to personal logbook
• Objections: clarified qualifying objections
• Peer Review: improved description
• Respond to Organizational Driver: integrated information about
qualifying drivers
• Role: clarified role keeper may maintain a governance backlog,
introduced the term “role keeper” for a person in a role
• Proposal Forming: added criteria for selecting tuners, added step
for prioritizing considerations, small clarifications
• Resolve Objections: updated illustration to better reflect the pro-
cess
Renamed Patterns:
• Backbone Organization to Service Organization
• Effectiveness Review to Peer Review
• Strategy to Develop Strategy
• Domain Description to Clarify Domains
• Describing Deliverables to Describe Deliverables
Added Patterns:
• Delegate Influence
• Describe Drivers
• Open Domain
Removed Patterns

ebook.2022.0405.2355 242
 • Coordination Circle
• Nested Domains
• Qualify Driver

ebook.2022.0405.2355 243
2. Alphabetical List Of All Patterns

Adapt Patterns To Context: Adapt and evolve S3 patterns to suit

your specific context.
Adopt The Seven Principles: Align collaboration with the Seven
Principles.
Agree On Values: Intentionally evolve the culture in your organiza-
tion.
Align Flow: In support of continuous flow of value, move decision-
making close to where value is created, and align the flow of informa-
tion accordingly.
Artful Participation: Commit to doing your best to act and interact
in ways that enable effective collaboration.
Ask For Help: A simple protocol for learning, skill sharing, and
building connections, with respect for people’s agency.
Backlog: A backlog (to-do-list) is a list of (often prioritized) uncom-
pleted work items (deliverables), or (drivers) that need to be addressed.
Be The Change: Lead by example.
Breaking Agreements: Break agreements when you are certain the
benefit for the organization outweighs the cost of waiting to amend
that agreement first, and take responsibility for any consequences.
Bylaws: Secure S3 principles and patterns in your bylaws as needed to
protect legal integrity and **organizational culture
Check In: Help people to become aware of themselves and others, and
to focus, be present and engage.

244
Circle: A circle is a self-governing and semi-autonomous team of
equivalent people who collaborate to account for a domain.
Clarify Intended Outcome: Be explicit about the expected results
of agreements, activities, projects and strategies.
Clarify and Develop Domains: Explicitly clarify, and then regu-
larly evaluate and develop a domain’s design based on learning, to en-
able those with responsibility for the domain to account for it as effec-
tively as possible.
Clarify and Develop Strategy: A strategy is a high level approach
for how people will create value to successfully account for a domain.
Co-Create Proposals: Bring people together to co-create proposals
in response to organizational drivers: tap collective intelligence, build
sense of ownership and increase engagement and accountability.
Consent Decision-Making: A (facilitated) group process for
decision-making: invite objections, and consider information and
knowledge revealed to further evolve proposals or existing agreements.
Continuous Improvement Of Work Process: Reveal drivers and
establish a metrics-based pull-system for organizational change through
continuously improving and refining the work process.
Contract For Successful Collaboration: Support successful collab-
oration from the start and build trust between parties by co-creating
mutually beneficial and legally robust contracts.
Coordination Meeting: Meet on a regular basis (usually weekly) for
reporting on and coordinating work across domains.
Coordinator: A person fulfilling the role of a coordinator is account-
able for coordinating a domain’s operations and is **selected for a
limited term.
Create a Pull-System For Organizational Change: Create an
environment that invites and enables members of the organization to
drive change.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 245
Daily Standup: Meet daily to organize work, facilitate learning and
improve your productivity and effectiveness.
Delegate Circle: Delegate making governance decisions affecting mul-
tiple domains to representatives selected by those domains.
Delegate Influence: Distribute the power to influence, to enable peo-
ple to decide and act for themselves within defined constraints.
Describe Deliverables: Clearly describe any deliverables related to
an agreement to support shared understanding of expectations.
Describe Organizational Drivers: Describe organizational drivers
to understand, communicate and remember them.
Development Plan: A plan for how to develop more effective ways of
accounting for a domain, agreed between delegator and delegatee.
Double Linking: Enable the two-way flow of information and influ-
ence between two teams.
Double-Linked Hierarchy: Delegate all authority for making gover-
nance decisions to self-governing circles, double-linked across all levels
of the hierarchy, to transition from an traditional hierarchy towards
a structure more suitable for tapping collective intelligence, ensuring
equivalence and building engagement.
Driver Mapping: A workshop format for large groups to co-create
and organize themselves in response to a complex situation of signifi-
cant scope and scale.
Evaluate And Evolve Agreements: Continuously evolve the body
of agreements, and eliminate waste.
Evaluate Meetings: Take time for learning at the end of each meet-
ing or workshop.
Evaluation Criteria: Develop well-defined evaluation criteria to de-
termine if acting on an agreement had the desired effect.
Facilitate Meetings: Choose someone to facilitate a meeting to help
the group maintain focus, keep the meeting on track and draw out the
participant’s creativity and wisdom.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 246
Fractal Organization: Multiple constituents (organizations or
projects) with a common (or similar) primary driver and structure can
share learning across functional domains, align action and make high
level governance decisions (e.g. overall strategy).
Governance Backlog: A governance backlog is a visible, priori-
tized list of items (drivers) that are related to governing a domain and
require attention.
Governance Facilitator: Select someone to facilitate governance
meetings.
Governance Meeting: Teams meet at regular intervals to decide
what to do to achieve objectives, and to set constraints on how and
when things will be done.
Helping Team: Bring together a team of equivalent people with the
mandate to execute on a specific set of requirements defined by a dele-
gator.
Invite Change: Clarify the reason for change and invite people to
participate.
Involve Those Affected: Involve people in making decisions that
affect them, to maintain equivalence and accountability, and to increase
the amount of information available on the subject.
Limit Work in Progress: Limit the number of work items in any
stage of your work process.
Linking: Enable the flow of information and influence between two
teams.
Logbook: Maintain a coherent and accessible system that stores all
information required for collaboration.
Logbook Keeper: Select a member of your team to be specifically
accountable for keeping up to date records of all information the team
requires.
Meeting Host: Select someone to take responsibility for the prepara-
tion and follow-up of meetings, workshops or other events.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 247
Navigate via Tension: Pay attention to tension you experience in
relation to the organization, investigate the cause and pass on any or-
ganizational drivers you discover to the people accountable for the ap-
propriate domain.
Open Space For Change: Invite everyone to create and run experi-
ments for evolving the organization.
Open Systems: Intentionally communicate with and learn from oth-
ers outside of your system.
Open Team: Intentionally account for a domain by invitation rather
than assignment, and request that those invited contribute when they
can.
Peach Organization: Deliver value in complex and competitive en-
vironments through decentralization (of resources and influence) and
direct interaction between those creating value and the customers they
serve.
Peer Feedback: Invite any member of your organization to give you
some constructive feedback on your performance in a role or in a team,
about your general participation and contribution, or about any other
area you wish to develop.
Peer Review: Support each other to learn and grow in the roles and
teams you serve in.
Planning And Review Meetings: People meet at regular intervals
(1–4 weeks) in timeboxed meetings to plan and review work.
Prepare For Meetings: Prepare in advance to make meetings more
effective.
Prioritize Backlogs: Order all uncompleted work items with the
most important items first, then pull work items from the top when-
ever there is new capacity.
Proposal Forming: A (facilitated) group process for co-creating a
response to a driver.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 248
Pull-System For Work: People pull in new work items when they
have capacity (instead of having work pushed or assigned to them).
Reasoned Decision-Making: Engage in productive dialogue by in-
vestigating different perspectives and the knowledge of participants, to
reach agreement on what is considered viable, relevant, valid or empiri-
cally true.
Record Agreements: Record the details of agreements you make, so
you can recall them later, evaluate the outcome and evolve the agree-
ment over time.
Representative: Select a team member to participate in the gover-
nance decision-making of another team to enable the flow of informa-
tion and influence.
Resolve Objections: Use the information revealed by an objection
to identify ways to evolve proposals, agreements and actions to a good-
enough state.
Respond to Organizational Drivers: Clarify organizational drivers
(i.e. what’s happening and what’s needed in relation to the organiza-
tion), and respond as required.
Retrospective: Dedicate time to reflect on past experience, learn, and
decide how to improve work process.
Role: Delegate responsibility for a domain to individuals.
Role Selection: A group process for selecting a person for a role on
the strength of the reason.
Rounds: In a group meeting, go around the circle giving everyone the
chance to speak in turn.
Service Circle: Outsource services required by two or more domains.
Service Organization: Multi-stakeholder collaboration and alignment
towards a shared driver (or objective).
Support Role: Apply the role pattern to external contractors.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 249
Test Arguments Qualify as Objections: Utilize your limited time
and resources wisely by testing if arguments qualify as objections and
only acting on those that do.
Timebox Activities: Set a time constraint to stay focused, bring con-
sciousness to the time you have and how you use it.
Transparent Salary: Create a fair salary formula and make it trans-
parent.
Visualize Work: Maintain a system that allows all stakeholders to re-
view the state of all work items currently pending, in progress or com-
plete.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 250
3. Links

The latest online version of the Practical Guide at http://

patterns.sociocracy30.org can be annotated via hypothes.is and comes
with an alphabetical index and a pattern map for easy navigation.
Various other formats and languages of the practical guide can be
found at http://sociocracy30.org/guide/
More S3 Resources: http://sociocracy30.org/resources/
Main S3 website: http://sociocracy30.org
Follow us on twitter: @sociocracy30

251
4. License

“A Practical Guide for Evolving Agile and Resilient Organizations

with Sociocracy 3.0” by Bernhard Bockelbrink, James Priest and Lil-
iana David is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-
ShareAlike 4.0 International License, which is a Free Culture
License.
Basically this license grants you:
1. Freedom to use the work itself.
2. Freedom to use the information in the work for any purpose, even
commercially.
3. Freedom to share copies of the work for any purpose, even com-
mercially.
4. Freedom to make and share remixes and other derivatives for any
purpose.
You need to attribute the original creator of the materials, and
all derivatives need to be shared under the same license.
To view the the full text of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
There’s more on the topic of free culture on the Creative Commons
website1 .

1
https://creativecommons.org/freeworks

252
4.1. Attribution of derivative works

If you create a derivative work, you must give appropriate credit, and
indicate which changes you made. A good attribution contains title,
author, source and license, like this:
This work, “[name of your work]”, is a derivative of “A
Practical Guide for Evolving Agile and Resilient Organiza-
tions with Sociocracy 3.0” by James Priest, Bernhard Bock-
elbrink and Liliana David used under CC BY SA. “[name of
your work]” is licensed under CC BY SA by [your name].
You can find out more about attribution on the Creative Commons
page about best practices for attribution2 .

2
https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/best_practices_for_attribution

ebook.2022.0405.2355 253
5. Disclaimer

The information available in this guide may be used by any entity/

organization. Consequently, any entity/organization may use, from
the information and suggestions made available, those it finds useful,
depending on the particularities of the activity carried out by that en-
tity/organization. For the avoidance of doubt, the authors of said in-
formation shall not be held liable, in any form whatsoever, in respect
of the achievement of certain objectives and/or attainment of certain
results by such entities/organizations further to the use of the infor-
mation or any one or several of the suggestions made available in this
guide.

254
6. The Intentional Commitment
for Practitioners and Teachers
of Sociocracy 3.0 (ICPT)

This commitment supports:

Practitioners and teachers with clear guidance on how to continu-
ally develop their experience and skills in sharing about and applying
S3 patterns, and improve their knowledge and understanding of S3 as it
evolves.
Clients and students in selecting the people they wish to work with
and learn from, according to their level of experience and the quality
and integrity of their work.
If you follow the voluntary Commitment you can add our banners to
your website, or to other materials that promote you as a practitioner
or teacher of Sociocracy 3.0. Please consider signing the commitment
so that we can notify you of proposed changes to the ICPT and seek
any objections or concerns you may have. Thank you.
You can find out more about the ICPT at https://sociocracy30.org/
s3-intentional-commitment/

6.1. Full Text of the ICPT

Intentional Commitment for Practitioners and Teachers of So-

ciocracy 3.0

255
I commit to developing a sociocratic and agile mindset, and I hold my-
self accountable to practice and teach Sociocracy 3.0 with integrity, by
following these guidelines:
I strive to follow the seven principles in my daily life. I commit to par-
ticipating artfully in my collaboration with others.
I practice and facilitate S3 patterns.
I maintain appropriate confidentiality about issues relating to my
clients.
I will work in accordance with my level of competence and the client’s
needs, and disclose when I am out of my depth.
I stay up to date with the ongoing developments of the S3 and the way
it’s presented. (e.g. by following the changelog in the latest version of
the practical guide)
I will continue learning about S3, deepen my understanding and ex-
plore related topics.
I am transparent about my level of experience, my understanding of
S3, the feedback I receive and my development plan.
I conduct regular peer reviews, and I integrate feedback from clients
and peers into evolving what I’m doing.
I will give all clients/peers the chance to publicly share feedback.
I am part of an organized intervision group (of at least 3 people, e.g. a
triad or a circle) for collaborative learning to support my development,
where I share about my practice and offer and receive help from peers,
including relating to resources any one of us creates.
I dedicate some time to actively support others from the S3 community
to learn and grow.
I will make any S3 resources I adapt or create available under a Cre-
ative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license.
I will discuss possible objections relating to S3 patterns in my intervi-
sion group, and pass to S3 developers if I believe they qualify.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 256
7. Acknowledgments
The content of Sociocracy 3.0 reflects the accumulated experience and
wisdom of contributors across generations. These people have shared
a common quest: to evolve more effective, harmonious and conscious
ways of collaborating together.
Particular recognition goes to Gerard Endenburg and others over the
years who have committed significant time towards evolving and doc-
umenting the Sociocratic Circle Organization Method, which has con-
tributed towards and inspired the evolution of Sociocracy 3.0.
We’d also like to recognize all those who have worked extensively to
facilitate the emergence of a more agile and lean mindset, and those
who have developed and shared various practices with the world.
Finally to acknowledge our numerous colleagues, customers, clients and
attendees of Sociocracy 3.0 courses who have chosen to experiment
with Sociocracy 3.0. Thank you for contributing your ongoing feedback
to help evolve the patterns and enable us all to learn and grow.
By no means an exhaustive list, we’d like to offer our appreciation to
the following people who directly contributed toward developing So-
ciocracy 3.0, or whose work influenced what it is today:
Gojko Adzic, Lyssa Adkins, Christopher Alexander, David J. Anderson,
Ruth Andrade, Jurgen Appelo, Kent Beck, Sue Bell, Sonja Blignaut,
Angelina Bockelbrink, Jesper Boeg, Kees Boeke, Mary Boone, John
Buck, Betty Cadbury, Diana Leafe Christian, Mike Cohn, Stephen
Covey, Gigi Coyle, Jef Cumps, David Deida, Esther Derby, Kourosh
Dini, Jutta Eckstein, Frands Frydendal, Gerard Endenburg, Andreas
Hertel, Andrei Iuoraia, François Knuchel, Diana Larsen, Helmut Leit-
ner, Jim and Michele McCarthy, Pieter van der Meche, Daniel Mezick,

257
Susanne Mühlbauer, Niels Pfläging, Mary and Tom Poppendieck, Karl
Popper, Brian Robertson, Marshall Rosenberg, Dave Snowden, Hal and
Sidra Stone, Ken Schwaber, Jeff Sutherland, Sharon Villines, Nathaniel
Whitestone, Ken Wilber, Jack Zimmerman.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 258
8. Authors

We sell consulting, learning facilitation, coaching and mentoring, in-

cluding but not limited to Sociocracy 3.0. We dedicate a part of our
time and money to create free resources about Sociocracy 3.0 as part
of our ongoing commitment to make sociocracy and related ideas more
accessible to the wider world.

Figure 8.1.: James Priest, Liliana David, Bernhard Bockelbrink

James Priest serves internationally, providing organizational devel-

opment consultancy, learning facilitation, and mentoring for people
wishing to evolve collaborative, adaptive organizations at scale.
https://thriveincollaboration.com
[email protected]
Bernhard Bockelbrink is an agile coach, trainer and consultant sup-
porting individuals, teams and organizations in navigating complex
challenges and developing a culture of effective, conscious and joyful
collaboration.

259
https://evolvingcollaboration.com
[email protected]
Liliana David serves internationally, providing training, facilitation
and mentoring to teams and organizations wishing to develop greater
effectiveness and equivalence in collaboration.
https://thriveincollaboration.com
[email protected]

8.1. Our Commitment to You

We dedicate a part of our time and money to create free resources

about Sociocracy 3.0 as part of our ongoing commitment to make so-
ciocracy and related ideas more accessible to the wider world.
There’s an overlap between what we give away for free and how we
make a living. Besides our work co-developing Sociocracy 3.0, we also
sell consulting, facilitation, coaching and mentoring services, and design
and delivery courses and events about, but not limited to Sociocracy
3.0.
You can always rely on the the Practical Guide as being the current
and authoritative description of Sociocracy 3.0, which will always be
available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Inter-
national License.
On top of that, we make all the content of this website and all the ma-
terials on the Resources page available under the same license.
We share new documentation we create, describing and explaining
about S3 patterns and how they can be applied, in the Practical Guide
and on the Sociocracy 3.0 website, when those documents are in a state
of readiness that we are happy with.
To find out how you can contribute to the development of S3, go to
https://sociocracy30.org/contribute/

ebook.2022.0405.2355 260
9. Glossary

Account for (v.): to take the responsibility for something.

Accountability (principle): Respond when something is
needed, do what you agreed to do, and accept your share of
responsibility for the course of the organization, so that what
needs doing gets done, nothing is overlooked and everyone does what
they can to contribute toward the effectiveness and integrity of the
organization.
Agreement: An agreed upon guideline, process, protocol or policy
designed to guide the flow of value.
Alignment: The process of bringing the actions of all parts of an or-
ganization in line with the organization’s objectives.
Backlog: A list of (often prioritized) uncompleted work items (deliver-
ables), or drivers that need to be addressed.
Check-In: A brief disclosure where you share something about what’s
up for you and how you are, revealing thoughts, feelings, distractions or
needs.
Chosen Values: A set of principles a team (or an organization) has
chosen to collectively adopt to guide their behavior in the context of
their collaboration.
Circle: A self-governing and semi-autonomous team of equivalent peo-
ple who collaborate to account for a domain.
Complexity: An environment where unknowns are unknown, cause
and effect can only be understood in retrospect, and actions lead to
unpredictable changes. [Snowden and Boone]

261
Concern: An assumption that cannot (for now at least) be backed up
by reasoning or enough evidence to prove its relevance or validity to
those who are considering it.
Consent (principle): Raise, seek out and resolve objections
to decisions and actions, so that you can reduce the potential for
undesirable consequences and discover worthwhile ways to improve.
Constituent: A team (e.g. a circle, team, department, branch, project
or organization) who delegate authority to a representative to act on
their behalf in other team or organizations.
Continuous Improvement (principle): Regularly review the
outcome of what you are doing, and then make incremental
improvements to what you do and how you do it based on
what you learn, so that you can adapt to changes when necessary,
and maintain or improve effectiveness over time.
Coordination: The process of enabling individuals or teams to collab-
orate effectively across different domains to achieve shared objectives.
Delegatee: An individual or group accepting responsibility for a do-
main delegated to them, becoming a role keeper or a team.
Delegation: The grant of authority by one party (the delegator) to
another (the delegatee) to account for a domain (i.e. to do certain
things and/or to make certain decisions), for which the delegator main-
tains overall accountability.
Delegator: An individual or group delegating responsibility for a do-
main to other(s).
Deliverable: A product, service, component or material provided in
response to an organizational driver.
Domain: A distinct area of influence, activity and decision-making
within an organization.
Driver: A person’s or a group’s motive for responding to a specific
situation.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 262
Effectiveness (principle): Devote time only to what brings you
closer towards achieving your organization’s overall objectives,
so that you can make the best use of your limited time, energy and re-
sources.
Empiricism (principle): Test all assumptions you rely on
through experiments and continuous revision, so that you learn
fast, make sense of things and navigate complexity as effectively as you
can.
Equivalence (principle): Involve people in making and evolv-
ing decisions that affect them, so that you increase engagement
and accountability, and make use of the distributed intelligence toward
achieving and evolving your objectives.
Evolve (v.): to develop gradually.
Flow of Value: Deliverables traveling through an organization to-
wards customers or other stakeholders.
Governance: The process of setting objectives and making and evolv-
ing decisions that guide people towards achieving those objectives.
Governance Backlog: A visible, prioritized list of items (drivers)
that are related to governing a domain and require attention.
Helping Team: A team of equivalent people with the mandate to ex-
ecute on a specific set of requirements.
Intended Outcome: The expected result of an agreement, action,
project or strategy.
Key responsibilities: Essential work and decision-making required in
the context of a domain.
Logbook: A (digital) system to store all information relevant for run-
ning an organization.
Metric: A quantifiable measure used to track and assess progress,
evaluate outcomes and determine success
Need: The lack of something wanted or deemed necessary (a require-
ment).

ebook.2022.0405.2355 263
Objection: An argument – relating to a proposal, agreement, activity
or the existing state of affairs – that reveals consequences or risks you’d
rather avoid, or demonstrates worthwhile ways to improve.
Objective: A (specific) result that a person or team or organization
wants to achieve; an aim or a goal.
Open Team: A group of people who are invited to contribute to the
work and governance done in a domain when they can.
Operations: Doing the work and organizing day-to-day activities
within the constraints defined through governance.
Operations Backlog: A visible list of (typically prioritized) uncom-
pleted work items (deliverables).
Organization: A group of people collaborating toward a shared driver
(or objective). Often an organization subdivides into several teams.
Organizational Driver: A driver is a person’s or a group’s motive for
responding to a specific situation. A driver is considered an organiza-
tional driver if responding to it would help the organization generate
value, eliminate waste or avoid unintended consequences.
Pattern: A process, practice or guideline that serves as a template for
successfully responding to a specific kind of challenge or opportunity.
Peer Domain: Two peer domains are contained within the same im-
mediate superdomain, and may be overlapping.
Primary Driver: The primary driver for a domain is the main driver
that people who account for that domain respond to.
Principle: A basic idea or rule that guides behavior, or explains or
controls how something happens or works.
Role: A domain that is delegated to an individual, who then becomes
the role keeper.
Role Keeper: An individual taking responsibility for a role.
Self-Governance: People governing themselves within the constraints
of a domain.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 264
Self-Organization: Any activity or process through which people
organize work. Self-organization happens within the constraints of a
domain, but without the direct influence of external agents. In any
organization or team, self-organization co-exists with external influ-
ence (e.g. external objections or governance decisions that affect the
domain).
Semi-Autonomy: The autonomy of people to decide for themselves
how to create value, limited by the constraints of their domain, and by
objections brought by the delegator, representatives, or others.
Social Technology: Social technology is any process, technique,
method, skill or any other approach that people can use to influence
social systems — organizations, societies, communities etc. — to sup-
port achieving shared objectives and guide meaningful interaction and
exchange.
Sociocracy: An approach for organizing together where people af-
fected by decisions can influence them on the basis of reasons to do so.
Sociocratic Circle-Organisation Method (SCM): An egalitarian
governance method for organizations based on a sociocratic mindset,
developed in the Netherlands by Gerard Endenburg.
Strategy: A high level approach for how people will create value to
successfully account for a domain.
Subdomain: A domain that is fully contained within another domain.
Subdriver: A subdriver arises as a consequence of responding to an-
other driver (the superdriver) and is essential for effectively responding
to the superdriver.
Superdomain: A domain that fully contains another domain.
Superdriver: see subdriver.
Team: A group of people collaborating toward a shared driver (or ob-
jective). Typically a team is part of an organization, or it is formed as
a collaboration of several organizations.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 265
Tension: A personal experience, a symptom of dissonance between an
individual’s perception of a situation, and their expectations or prefer-
ences.
Timebox: A fixed period of time spent focused on a specific activity
(which is not necessarily finished by the end of the timebox).
Transparency (principle): Record all information that is valu-
able for the organization and make it accessible to everyone
in the organization, unless there is a reason for confidential-
ity, so that everyone has the information they need to understand
how to do their work in a way that contributes most effectively to the
whole.
Value: The importance, worth or usefulness of something in relation
to a driver. Also “a principle of some significance that guides behavior”
(mostly used as plural, “values”, or “organizational values”).
Values: Valued principles that guide behavior. Not to be confused
with “value” (singular) in the context of a driver.
Waste: Anything unnecessary for — or standing in the way of — a
(more) effective response to a driver.

ebook.2022.0405.2355 266
List of Figures

4.1. Influences and history of Sociocracy 3.0 . . . . . . . . . . 16

5.1. Three variants of sociocracy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

0.1. The Seven Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

2.1. Domains may overlap and/or be fully contained within

other domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

1.1. Possible responses to organizational drivers . . . . . . . . 72

1.2. Navigate via Tension, Describe Organizational Drivers,
Respond To Organizational Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
1.3. Describe Organizational Drivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
1.4. Consent Decision-Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
1.5. A process for testing if an argument qualifies as an ob-
jection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
1.6. Process for resolving an objection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
1.7. Recursive application of the Resolve Objection pattern . . 94
1.8. Experiment, evaluate, evolve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
1.9. A long format for evaluating and evolving agreements . . 96
1.10. A template for proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
1.11. Proposal forming process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
1.12. Reasoned Decision-Making . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
1.13. Table: Mapping the steps of RDM to the other S3
decision-making processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
1.14. Role selection process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

2.1. Template for a domain description . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

267
 2.2. Strategies are validated and refined through experimen-
tation and learning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
2.3. Aligning the flow of information to support the flow of
value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
2.4. Driver Mapping: Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
2.5. Driver Mapping: A Need Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
2.6. Driver Mapping: A template for domains . . . . . . . . . 127

3.1. Peer review process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

3.2. Continuous improvement of people’s ability to effectively
keep roles or collaborate in teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
3.3. A template for development plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

4.1. Balance autonomy and collaboration through artful par-

ticipation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
4.2. The Seven Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
4.3. An organization’s values need to embrace the Seven
Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
4.4. Chosen values define constraints for collaboration . . . . . 140
4.5. Two ways of opening salaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

5.1. All members of a circle are equally accountable for gov-

ernance of the circle’s domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
5.2. People can take responsibility for more than one role . . . 151
5.3. One circle linked to another circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
5.4. Double linking two circles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
5.5. Open Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
5.6. Helping Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156

6.1. Phases of adapting patterns to a specific context . . . . . 158

6.2. Drivers, Value and Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

7.1. Any agreement or decision can be viewed as an experiment.162

7.2. The Life-Cycle of an Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
7.3. Template for agreements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
7.4. Intended Outcome, and Evaluation Criteria . . . . . . . . 166

ebook.2022.0405.2355 268
 8.1. Output of a retrospective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
8.2. Phases of a governance meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
8.3. Daily standup is an essential meeting for self-organizing
teams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
8.4. Planning and review meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
8.5. Phases of a coordination meeting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

9.1. Rounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179

9.2. Evaluate meetings right before closing the meeting . . . . 183
9.3. The governance facilitator is typically a member of the
team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186

10.1. Visualization of a simple work process . . . . . . . . . . . 189

10.2. A card representing a work item . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

11.1. Delegate Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195

11.2. Service Circle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
11.3. Peach Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
11.4. A double-linked hierarchy: not your typical hierarchy . . . 199
11.5. Service Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200
11.6. Fractal Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
0.1. The Common Sense Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205

3.1. Two Principles for Orientation: Clarify Purpose – De-

velop Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211

4.1. Three Principles for Navigation: Focus on Value – Sense

& Respond – Run Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214

5.1. Two Principles for Structure: Enable Autonomy – Col-

laborate on Dependencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218

6.1. Three Principles for Transformation: Invest in Learning

– Intentionally Develop Culture – Build Shared Mental
Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222

7.1. Ten Principles for Evolving Teams and Organizations . . 226

ebook.2022.0405.2355 269
 8.1. James Priest, Liliana David, Bernhard Bockelbrink . . . . 259

ebook.2022.0405.2355 270