Elevating inclusion, belonging, and democracy in peoples’ worklife requires a delicate balance of autonomy and connection. Sociocracy is a type of organizational collaboration that cultivates psychological safety and inclusive decision making with the intention of unlocking human potential – in such communities “those who associate together govern together”. Circles represent one of the most important sociocratic tools of governance. Here are three ways that circles empower and connect communities of all kinds.

What are circles?

According to Ted Rau and Jerry Koch-Gonzalez, authors of Many Voices, One Song, “circles” refer to work teams that serve as “the heart of every organization” by deciding the mission of a team, how it connects to the purpose of an organization, and how work gets done:

Circles are a way to “package” related parcels of work and to focus attention easily and maximally, while still keeping the pieces of the whole connected. The difference between non-sociocratic committees and circles is that circles have more authority and the requirement to be connected to the other circles. Circles are never floating around, they are always linked to another related circle. An ideal circle structure will represent the idea of “a place for everything, and everything in its place”. Since the circle structure is also dynamic, we have order without having rigidity. We can grow, adapt, and be nimble … The circle members are the experts of the work they do, and they have the skills and knowledge to govern how their work is being done.

Quite literally, Rau and Koch-Gonzales imagine this novel organizational design as interconnected circles.

During one of my first leadership gigs I naively set out to build a flat and/or halocratic team, which was inspired – in part – by Valve’s handbook for new employees (one of the activities for new hires is to draw how they see the organizational structure … because it is highly adaptive based on the work).

Here is how Zappos employees circles.

Notice the circles? They feature quite prominently in this democratic, but not formally cooperative, organization.

Lead with humanism

People are intrinsically motivated to do good work. For thousands of years we have applied energy to create value for each other. Also, nobody wants to work with assholes. Just ask Adam Grant.

At the heart of sociocracy is the belief that no one should be ignored because everyone has value to offer when teams make decisions. Leading with humanism means treating people equitably and with respect, regardless of their role in the organization. Circles enable a people-centric approach by empowering employees with more control over their work.

Foster autonomy

Organizations thrive when decisions can be made as close to stakeholders as possible. For a hotel concierge, this could mean being empowered to solve problems for guests with thousands of dollars and a network of community partners. For a member of my learning team, it could mean having the authority to provide subject matter experts with software licenses to create their own microlearning. Highly-specific circles, detailed below, make decisions with customers and other stakeholders because folks in these team are empowered to do so.

The organizational structure in sociocracy is decentralized. At scale this means that the system can grow and adapt on its own by creating new branches that adhere to the same mechanisms. Rau and Koch-Gonzales argue that when circles have completed an aim or outcome they can dissolve: “Growth (and de-growth) is smooth and follows the demand and intention of the organization.” Stopping work is a fantastic example of autonomy and empowerment at play.

Cultivate collaboration with clarity

How we communicate impacts relationships everywhere. Great communication According to Fast Company’s Vanessa Wasche, listening deeply and seeking to understand your audience’s or partner’s point of view increases the likelihood of achieving clarity: “If you start from their perspective and are then able to match the points they want to hear—or address the differences—your communication will become much more effective and economical.” Multiple circles get super-clear on their shared mission and get even more clear on how their different aims connect, complement, and/or uniquely serve the mission.

Whether organizations embrace halocracy, sociocracy, or other forms of self-organizing and self-management, folks need to have a clear understanding of what it is they are getting together to do – the “aim” (noted above) is the invitation to the work. Team members need the authority and resources to get the work done. People need be clear who is a part of the effort and what each person is doing. Sociocracy provides clarity on all three of those aspects and activates clarity, autonomy, and humanism through circles.

How might we make worklife more circular?