

The development roles are filled by one person, but in reality largely executed by people outside the organization that that one person manages. The accountabilities are also unclear to everyone but him, because it's very technical language, and he's not someone bought in sufficiently to care about making those clarifications.

As Facilitator of every circle, I consistently hear some variation of “I don't know which role of his to engage, but it's a Matt thing”. Sometimes the tension-holder will try to figure it out so we can capture an output correctly “Engage <insert role> about…” and it winds up feeling like a waste of time, instead of the healthy practice it is. These roles were also the genesis of a Plain Language Governance policy, and continue to be hard to decipher.

My perspective as our Social Technologist: as a new holacracy (that is transitioning towards full adoption of the Constitution), the work around development was over-engineered in a way that's unnecessarily differentiated to the point of being counter-productive.