VSHN’s Culture - How VSHN works
To work effectively as an organization, we need a common language and reusable structural patterns. This creates clarity about responsibilities and boundaries, enables everyone to participate in shaping the organization (governance), and fosters aligned, effective collaboration.
Organizational Structures
The following describe key structural elements that VSHN builds upon.
- Everything is a circle
From the Anchor Circle (whole VSHN) inward to individual Roles; Circles contain roles and/or sub-circles.
A Team is just an everyday term for a role held by multiple people, or a circle containing multiple roles and people.
A Domain is the area of responsibilities, stakeholders, constraints, budgets, etc. behind a role/circle, usually defined via a domain description.
When one or multiple people share the same set of responsibilities, it’s still simply a Role.
When a role needs internal division of responsibilities and thus delegates them further inward, it becomes a circle containing those different roles.
No sub-delegation means it remains a single role, regardless of how many people hold it.
Quick test: Sub-delegation needed? → Circle. No sub-delegation? → Role.
- Every circle serves its super-circle
Each circle contributes to the purpose and responsibilities of its parent circle.
For this, every circle provides metrics and/or goal progress transparently to the super-circle.
- Self-organization & self-governance at every level
Each circle manages its own coordination and prioritization (operations, the actual day-to-day work), as well as work agreements/policies and further delegation (governance) within its domain.
- Shared responsibility
All people in a circle (including those in the same role) share accountability for the circle’s purpose; every domain needs at least one person who takes responsibility and leads it, otherwise the circle can’t usefully exist.
- Super-Circles delegate, not control
Super-circles define purpose and responsibilities, constraints and review effectiveness (primarily outcomes and metrics), but don’t dictate how sub-circles operate internally, nor take part in internal operations or governance.
Decision-making stays in the responsible circle; the super-circle might advise in unclear situations and adapt the domain or policies governing future decisions by creating more clarity.
- Strategy & Scope
Every circle (and role) has its Strategy, whether written down or understood otherwise.
Strategy is simply a circle’s plan on how to fulfill its domain (its purpose) under the given constraints.
The further out, the broader the scope and higher-level the strategy a circle is responsible for; the further in, the narrower the scope and more tactical and operational the work.
Practices
The following describe key practices that make our organization work.
Governance
Every circle has a way and format to ensure that:
Tensions are understood as organizational drivers, and are tracked and prioritized transparently.
Drivers are addressed in time and effectiveness is reviewed later on.
Other circles can bring in and represent their tensions.
Other circles can bring in possible objections and that they are qualified.
Example Implementations
A periodic Governance Meeting, where others with tensions can join to understand the organizational driver together, or when they have possible objections, to qualify them together.
As part of the team retrospectives - track governance, for example making changes to team modus operandi.
Consent Decision-Making (CDM)
We create proposals to address an understood organizational driver.
We involve circles (the people in or in representation) who are potentially affected in input gathering to form a proposal.
Inputs are understood as advice, not hard requirements. How to weigh the opinions and ideas of the involved circles lies with the responsible circle.
Directly affected circles need to be checked, but also anyone can bring in possible objections.
The responsible circle qualifies possible objections → if so, and only then, they are objections.
This happens synchronously with the person having a possible objection, in a governance meeting of the responsible circle.
Ad-hoc meetings or other formats are possible, if made clear to involved people why it’s needed.
In the absence of objections, the proposal is to be implemented.
CDM is an ordered process
Driver → Proposal Forming (Gather Considerations, Inputs → Form Proposal) → No Objections → Agreement
Once there is a proposal, we only check for objections! If we have a proposal, we don’t stop or go back for: * Other ideas or inputs (if not an objection). * Adding stuff that is not addressing the driver.
Principles
The following explain the principles (primarily from Sociocracy 3.0) that build the foundation of how VSHN works.
Navigate via Tension
We evolve by treating tension as a signal. When something feels off (a mismatch between how things are and how they should be), that discomfort is taken seriously as a pointer to something worth improving or changing. Tensions are brought to the circle responsible for that area, which takes ownership and leads the effort to resolve it.
Objection
Any role or circle might have arguments (possible objection) to a proposal, current structures, or ongoing activity, at any time.
The responsible circle has to understand whether the argument reveals a risk for the organization or a worthwhile way to improve the subject (the proposal) now to qualify it as an objection.
Only a qualified argument is an objection, and only an objection stops us from proceeding. Concerns are documented for the future, but don’t stop us. A person cannot personally "object" to a proposal or activity.
- What can qualify as an objection
Your role/circle is negatively impacted by activities or governance of another circle.
You can demonstrate a more effective/more efficient way than what is proposed or compared to current activities, now.
You can point out a specific risk to the organization or business, or a violation of existing policies or law, for what is proposed or current activities that we would rather want to avoid.
Personal preference or other ideas alone do not qualify as an objection.
Governance
Governance is the process of defining (and delegating) the structures (circles, domains, policies) of the organization, and continuously reviewing and adjusting them.
The goal of governance is to give people clarity about expectations, enabling constraints and boundaries, to free them up to create value as independently as possible.
Strategy on its own is not Governance, see Strategy.
Delegation
While there might be reasons for bottom-up delegation, our default is that a circle delegates its direct sub-circles (and roles).
Changing a domain (a circle’s/role’s definition) is in the governance of its super-circle, the delegator – thus a circle cannot change its domain on its own; it’s the "boundaries" they operate within.
The delegator implements and, if needed, mandates through governance measures to understand & track the success (effectiveness) of delegated domains (key metrics, goal setting & tracking, etc.) - thereby enabling delegates to take ownership and act proactively based on shared visibility.
The delegator provides input/contributes to the strategy of its sub-circles, but the sub-circle has autonomy over it.
All policies and constraints also apply to any sub-circle, unless defined otherwise through delegation.
The delegating circle stays accountable for the outcomes of its sub-circles, but doesn’t intervene operationally; instead, it works through governance (domain definition, resources, goal setting).
Equivalence
All people in a circle have equal authority in governance decisions. People outside a circle have no authority, besides:
Those circles/roles affected by decisions are involved in decision-making. Having another opinion, preference or other idea does not mean you’re affected.
The delegator (super-circle) might review and change a domain (circle/role) anytime, involving the delegatees.
When one domain depends on another, governance affecting such an existing or new dependency involves the affected domains.
Stakeholders of a domain can bring in feedback; it’s up to the responsible circle how they act on it.
VSHNeers (as such, independent of their role) are considered affected if a deterioration in employee working conditions for many VSHNeers is expected.
Everyone can bring in ideas anytime, everyone might drive initiatives - the governance responsibility lies with the responsible circle though.
Strategy
While Governance defines the container (domains & constraints, the structure) - relatively stable unless changed through governance, Strategy defines the direction and goals within that container.
By default, every circle has a strategy – the plan for how to fulfill its purpose and contribute to the super-circle’s objectives within its domain constraints.
- Examples
Board: Strategic direction, multi-year goals, financial targets
VSHN Circle: Company strategy (markets, value proposition, yearly objectives).
Business Area/Product Circle – Product strategy (roadmap themes, success metrics, aligned with company strategy).
Team Circle: Operational plan (quarterly goals, improvement initiatives, contributing to product objectives).
Role: Personal focus areas (priorities, development goals within role expectations).