In “Maverick: The Success Behind the World’s Most Unusual Workplace” (Amazon link), Ricardo Semler tells the story of how he converted a traditionally structured business into one without walls and rules. The way he challenges assumptions and rethinks how a business can be run is inspirational. (It’s probably the business book that’s been read by more members of 37signals than any other.) Below are some excerpts…
A modern company must accept change as its basic premise:
To survive in modern times, a company must have an organizational structure that accepts change as its basic premise, lets tribal customs thrive, and fosters a power that is derived from respect, not rules. In other words, the successful companies will be the ones that put quality of life first. Do this and the rest – quality of product, productivity of workers, profits for all – will follow. At Semco we did away with strictures that dictate the “hows” and created fertile soil for differences. We gave people an opportunity to test, question, and disagree. We let them determine their own futures. We let them come and go as they wanted, work at home if they wished, set their own salaries, choose their own bosses. We let them change their minds and ours, prove us wrong when we are wrong, make us humbler. Such a system relishes change, which is the only antidote to the corporate brainwashing that has consigned giant businesses with brilliant pasts to uncertain futures.
Growth is often just about greed:
A few years ago, I struggled with an opportunity to acquire a company with five plants and 2,000 employees. “Why do we want to grow more?” I asked myself. Are we going to be better for it?”...
It’s all about persistence, isn’t it? But where does persistence end and obsession begin? How high is too high? How big is too big? Of course, some growth is necessary for any business to keep up with competitors and provide new opportunities for its people. But so often it is power and greed and plain stubbornness that make bigger automatically seem better…
Semco has learned that to want to grow big just to be big is a catch…Much about growth is really about ego and greed, not business strategy.
How rules snowball:
In their quest for law, order, stability, and predictability, corporations make rules for every conceivable contingency. Policy manuals are created with the idea that, if a company puts everything in writing, management will be more rational and objective. Standardizing methods and conduct will guide new employees and insure that the entire company has a single, cohesive image. And so it became accepted that large organizations could not function without hundreds or thousands or tens of thousands of rules.
Sounds sensible, right? And it works fine for an army or a prison system. But not, I believe, for a business. And certainly not for a business that wants people to think, innovate, and act as human beings whenever possible. All those rules cause employees to forget that a company needs to be creative and adaptive to survive. Rules slow it down…
With few exceptions, rules and regulations only serve to:
1. Divert attention from the company’s objective.
2. Provide a false sense of security for the executives.
3. Create work for bean counters.
4. Teach men to stone dinosaurs and start fire with sticks.The desire for rules and the need for innovation are, I believe, incompatible…Rules freeze companies inside a glacier; innovation lets them ride sleighs over it…A turtle may live for hundreds of years because it is well protected by its shell, but it only moves forward when it sticks out its head.
What’s wrong with bosses:
That’s what’s wrong with bosses. So many of them are better prepared to find error and to criticize than to add to the effort. To be the boss is what counts to most bosses. They confuse authority with authoritarianism. They don’t trust their subordinates.
Why bureaucracies get built:
Bureaucracies are built by and for people who busy themselves proving they are necessary, especially when they suspect they aren’t. All these bosses have to keep themselves occupied, and so they constantly complicate everything…I wanted our people to have more contact with one another. I wanted less clutter. I wanted fewer levels. I wanted more flexibility. I wanted a new shape for our organization.
Coming soon: More excerpts from Maverick.
Frank
on 07 Apr 08Is that legal, since you don’t hold the copyright.
This blog post seems neither as a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment as defined by U.S. Copyright Law.
From the sound of it (and from this blog post), it simply seems as though you are pulling out the best parts of Semler’s books and giving it out freely … without his permission I assume.
Jozzua
on 07 Apr 08Just bought the book yesterday and finding it quite educational. Employee empowerment. People in authority don’t like that.
Really, treat people like adults and they will act like one. I’d sure love to work here.
David Andersen
on 07 Apr 08Growth probably has quite a bit to do with greed, but it also has quite a bit to do with maximizing return on capital. Management is supposed to be seeking the best return for investors and not avoiding growth because it’s fashionable this month in “Fast Company”. Of course if the owners are the management then by all means, do as you please.
Vlad
on 07 Apr 08The snippet I like most is the one about bureaucracies. This makes me think of our current government and how it functions. It’s sad really, I think Veteran’s Affairs would benefit most from reading this book. Most businesses today have managers trying to justify why they exist by practicing tyranny. It’s sad, really…
ML
on 07 Apr 08Is that legal, since you don’t hold the copyright.
Frank, since this is just a few paragraphs from a 335 page book, I don’t believe there’s any copyright violation going on here. Bloggers’ FAQ – Intellectual Property explains why it’s fine to post excerpts this way.
Youpinadi
on 07 Apr 08This is so true… I hope one day i can work in this kind of company…
Yossef
on 07 Apr 08David,
The “but” in that first sentence implies that maximizing return on capital isn’t related to greed.
Peter
on 07 Apr 08looks like an actually-valuable business book. miracle.
David Andersen
on 07 Apr 08Yossef -
It may be related, it may not. It’s far too simplistic to label it greed without understanding the situation. And not all greed is bad (contrary to what Semler’s passage seems to imply).
Frank
on 07 Apr 08@ML
Per the link you provided, it notes that courts use four factors for determining “fair use” for copyrighted material. Those four factors are:
1. The purpose and character of the use. Transformative uses are favored over mere copying. Non-commercial uses are also more likely fair.
[Violation] This blog post is neither tranformative or non-commerical.
2. The nature of the copyrighted work. Is the original factual in nature or fiction? Published or unpublished? Creative and unpublished works get more protection under copyright, while using factual material is more often fair use.
[Violation] Semler work is creative.
3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used. Copying nearly all of a work, or copying its “heart” is less likely to be fair.
[Violation] These nuggets of information can easily be construed as the “heart” of Semler’s work.
4. The effect on the market or potential market. This factor is often held to be the most important in the analysis, and it applies even if the original is given away for free. If you use the copied work in a way that substitutes for the original in the market, it’s unlikely to be a fair use; uses that serve a different audience or purpose are more likely fair. Linking to the original may also help to diminish the substitution effect. Note that criticism or parody that has the side effect of reducing a market may be fair because of its transformative character. In other words, if your criticism of a product is so powerful that people stop buying the product, that doesn’t count as having an “effect on the market for the work” under copyright law.
[Potential Violation] This blog series, as noted at the bottom of the post, can easily be misinterpreted as a substitute for the original work.
So based on the four factors courts use to determine if a copyright violation occurred, which was found using the link you provided, it looks like 3+ of the four factors were violated.
I hate to be a stickler, I’m just trying to be a good friend to let you know this series of Semler’s excerpts might cause some problems.
Frank Gilroy
on 07 Apr 08Wow, I love you guys. Just added this book to my Amazon Wish List. Your post of excerpts alone puts into words my frustration with the last three companies I’ve worked for. Any chance I can get you guys to relocate your company to Philly?
Billy Waters
on 07 Apr 08@Frank. Get over it. You didn’t write the book. You aren’t being anyones friend, just a pain in the ass about a totally obvious but rather stale pedantic point. The only person causing a problem is you.
Get over yourself.
i made a mindmap of the book. I posted it here for all to see. http://watersconsulting.blogspot.com/2008/04/maverick-ricardo-semler.html
The mindmap I created and the post here on Signal Vs Noise are here because WE LOVED THE BOOK and we want more people to read it.
The book has been out since 1993 and we are not distributing the book verbatim to all and sundry. This is the new word of mouth.
All we are saying is that this is what we learned from the book and go and read it. There are billions of other copyright infractions out there Frank. See if you can catch ‘em all. I’ll be waiting…
Guys, buy the book. Buy a copy for everyone you know. Its the best “management” book since the sadly out of print Up the organisation by Robert Townsend.
ML
on 07 Apr 08Frank, I understand you’re trying to be a good friend but I disagree with your conclusions. 10 paragraphs out of 335 pages don’t constitute the “heart” of the book. People aren’t confusing this post with the actual book. There is commentary on the book (we like it and are encouraging others to check it out). This post isn’t hurting sales of the book (“the most important factor” in determining violation acc to the IP link above). Also, you left out this part from the link in your judgement:
David Andersen
on 07 Apr 08I hate to be a stickler, I’m just trying to be a good friend to let you know this series of Semler’s excerpts might cause some problems.
Frank, you may have a valid legal point, but I am quite sure that you don’t hate to be a stickler and are not trying to be a good friend.
FrankR
on 07 Apr 08For my part I can agree to “This post isn’t hurting sales of the book…” – I ordered from Amazon because I like the excerpts and like to read more …
Duarte Carrilho da Graça
on 07 Apr 08I bought the book some time ago, after reading about it on this blog!
Anonymous Coward
on 07 Apr 08@”We let them (...) set their own salaries”
How could this work in reality? No clue how to implement this in my company. Any ideas?
Billy Waters
on 07 Apr 08The fact that the Semco method is the exception and not the rule is because democracy is difficult and challenges those who want it least.
True democracy is a rare bird and utterly beautiful.
JF
on 07 Apr 08How could this work in reality? No clue how to implement this in my company. Any ideas?
It works because everyone’s salaries are out in the open. They also provide the salaries of equally skilled people at competing companies. So there are social pressures to be reasonable with your salary. And of course if you vote yourself a salary that is out of line, you could lose your job if the company doesn’t think you’re worth it.
Jake
on 07 Apr 08If all you guys did was post excerpts of this book, I would stay subscribed. Very inspirational. Jack Stack has some great stuff too.
J Lane
on 07 Apr 08@Anonymous Coward
Semco gives it’s employees a range from which they can set their salaries. So you tell an employee, you can get paid between 60,000 and 75,000. Salaries aren’t kept secret, and on a regular basis, employees are assessed by their peers as to whether they earned the salary they set for them self.
Semco also offers profit sharing, so the mentality is very much that if someone is over-paying them self, and under-performing, they are stealing profits and are thus cutting down on everyone else’s paycheck. It’s a ultra-performance based assessment.
J Lane
on 07 Apr 08@JF
You’ve posted about the other perks of working at 37signals before, any similarities between Semco and 37signals?
- Do you do profit sharing? - Do your employees set their own salaries?
Andrew Skegg
on 08 Apr 08Brilliant book! Fundamentally changed the way I thought about business and how they treat customers and employees.
Cali and Jody
on 08 Apr 08Ricardo Semler is a brilliant business person. He knows what all good CEOs should know, but most are completely oblivious to – treat employees like adults and you’ll reap more than you ever thought you could in terms of business results. Giving employees the freedom to control their own time and the work they do is a smart business strategy.
Read the book over and over – LOVE IT. The Seven-Day Weekend by Semler is an equally fantastic read.
Cali Ressler and Jody Thompson Creators of the Results-Only Work Environment (ROWE) Authors of the forthcoming book “WHY WORK SUCKS AND HOW TO FIX IT”
keik
on 08 Apr 08Oh you Americans thinking about lawsuits all the time. If i were Ricardo i probably would love to see my book quoted. This kind of book reviews i guess are great for sales.
Anyway, about the ideas in the book, they seem very cool but I don’t think it’s so easy, I guess it would take a a lot of care and luck to achieve what he has done.
Ola Berg
on 08 Apr 08Thanks to 37 Signals’ publishing of excerpts, I am going to buy this book. Now.
George
on 08 Apr 08Posting one set of quotes from the book is clearly fair play, and obviously benefits the author. Posting more sets of quotes from the book just smacks of laziness, tbh, and does start to feel quite ethically grey.
Paul Montwill
on 08 Apr 08I am glad that more and more people start thinking this way. Open-minded management. I can see so many people in different companies being nailed down to their desks with their creativity left at home. We all have such potential but are usually in structures that does not allow companies to benefit from it. Instead we are taught producitivity systems that allow us to do more boring job instead of just making the job exciting.
It is worth mentioning this blog: http://caliandjody.com/blog/. I found it very interesting.
Just saying
on 08 Apr 08Looks interesting. The Amazon readers comments contain many excerpts also…
Oh, and Semco’s English version of its website contains “hacked by_cRew” in the title tag of a few pages.
Adrian Smith
on 08 Apr 08I found out by talking to my dad that bosses used be called administrators. I think that’s a brilliant concept!
E.E. James
on 08 Apr 08I suspect that the more relevant problem for a small top flight shop with letting employees set their own salaries is that the employees will undervalue themselves out of modesty or a desire to be a good team player. I’m serious. Ask hot shots what they are worth and they will usually come in at mid-market for their role, not realizing how much everyone else sucks compared to them. I wonder if Semler’s ever tried asking people to pick and then adding 10-15%.
Billy Waters
on 08 Apr 08The book Getting Real is great too. My only wish is that it was in hardback so I could whack the un-real people over the head with it.
Mindmap of the book Maverick”>Visit W3Schools!
Anonymous Coward
on 08 Apr 08@JF “It works because everyone’s salaries are out in the open. They also provide the salaries of equally skilled people at competing companies.”
Very interesting concept.
Where to get the benchmark data of what other similar skilled people in ones industry earn?
Bonus question: in a virtual internet company where employees are spread around the globe do you pay attention to general geographic income differences?
anonymous
on 09 Apr 08have you guys seen the work WorldBlu is doing? they’re running a company on workplace democracy in nyc this fall—
http://www.worldblu.com/live/
i wonder if semler will be there?
Tom G
on 09 Apr 08To the author or publisher of the book or any other concerned person:
The few quotes listed here caused me to buy a book I didn’t know about.
As an author, I would be insulted if someone implied my book’s value was limited to a handful of paragraphs with the rest a wate of paper.
Alexis Perrier
on 09 Apr 08I work in a very rules focused company right now and it’s driving me crazy. Rules for moving your PC and desk, what’s on your home page, ... a total control freak environment where everyone is busy convincing themselves they are busy. It’s a mantra : I’m busy, I’m busy, I’m busy, ...
I just love the phrase : “A turtle may live for hundreds of years because it is well protected by its shell, but it only moves forward when it sticks out its head”
I will print it and tape it on my desk until a new rule is created to stop this chaotic and potentially dangerous behavior !
Max
on 09 Apr 08The idea expressed in the book could be applied in some industries / some kind of companies. Very often rules and bureaucracy are imposed from outside (authorities, governments and so on) and the respect of the rules could not be left in the good will of the employees.
Alexander Kjerulf
on 10 Apr 08Maverick is an excellent book and in my opinion Semler’s second The Seven-Day Weekend is even better simply because it was written 10 years later when they’d had even more time to develop and implement their ideas.
To me, Semco’s style of management is like eXtreme Programming. It’s about paring all the crap away that does nothing but hold people back in order to make people free to do their jobs well AND be happy at work.
And like XP, lots of people refuse to believe it can possibly work – even in the face of evidence from organizations who have been doing it successfully for years.
Stephan Branczyk
on 10 Apr 08However, you are not to question them. You are not to confront them. Do not even ask them if they are trespassing. That’s (possibly) the job of my friends and my trusted neighbors, not you.
And you Alexander, If you ever happen to stroll on my property. Please do not feel the need to justify yourself, excuse your presence, or explain yourself to some perfect stranger who demands an explanation.
If I didn’t want you there, I’d let you know. And to tell you frankly, it’s the perfect strangers that try to enforce my own property rights without my permission that really anger me, not the occasional well-intentioned strollers.
This discussion is completely theoretical of course. Since I’m not the copyright owner of that book, and I do not represent him. You can certainly disregard what I’ve said. And Frank can certainly disregard what I’ve said too.
The spirit of this book is actually so diametrically opposed to Frank’s mindset. It’s interesting that he chose to protect this particular book from possible copyright infringement. This particular book doesn’t require protection. It’s books from the likes of James Dobson that possibly require protection, not this one.
And by putting a damper on this free word-of-mouth publicity, it’s Frank’s statement and subsequent statements that are possibly causing financial harm to the copyright owner—not the quotes.
- Stephan
This discussion is closed.