In a system like this, who is going to do maintenance tasks? How do you keep people from just working on the fun things? Why would you expect an developer to have any insight into future market conditions? What happens when a customer says "I need this feature" and the account manager comes back and says "guys we need this feature" and no one wants to implement it?
This structure is great for a very specific type of company (B2C, creating cutting edge products that are fun to work on and interesting enough that they can hire the best talent [aka Valve]).
In most types of companies this would just result in the crappy work never getting done.
IMO you can look at this from an evolutionary standpoint. If this were such a great way to run a company don't you think you'd see more successful companies doing this besides Valve?
Believe it or not there are people who like doing the maintenance tasks.
>How do you keep people from just working on the fun things?
Why would you?
>Why would you expect an developer to have any insight into future market conditions?
I wouldnt. Although, if they are familiar with a product and its users they probably have as good of an idea as say, random account manager.
> What happens when a customer says "I need this feature" and the account manager comes back and says "guys we need this feature" and no one wants to implement it?
In my example the cluster formed around a developer. A cluster could just as easily form around a sales guy, an exec, the guy who makes sure the vending machine is always full.
The customer says I need feature x, the sales guy starts building a team while doing whatever work he can- taking requirements, etc;
It is the job of the bosses to build a good HR process and
provide leadership and vision. If they are good at what they do and respected, when they say, "now we will move in this direction", the new ideas will start to gravitate in that direction. If not, there has to be a process to get execs who can do that.
> If this were such a great way to run a company don't you think you'd see more successful companies doing this besides Valve?
Heirarchy is something that has been firmly established in human culture for a long time. New ideas about how to organize humans are emerging and old ones are being revisited.
Having said that, the Gore company makes products for use by industry and has had a nontraditional organization for the last 50 years.
In the U.S. most non-hierarchical businesses are small local coops in the form of bakeries, coffee shops, etc- people experimenting. But there's no reason it couldnt work for a company that sells software or information.
As much as the world needs ditch diggers there are people who need jobs digging ditches. You dont have to force them to do it.
In a system like this, who is going to do maintenance tasks? How do you keep people from just working on the fun things? Why would you expect an developer to have any insight into future market conditions? What happens when a customer says "I need this feature" and the account manager comes back and says "guys we need this feature" and no one wants to implement it?
This structure is great for a very specific type of company (B2C, creating cutting edge products that are fun to work on and interesting enough that they can hire the best talent [aka Valve]).
In most types of companies this would just result in the crappy work never getting done.
IMO you can look at this from an evolutionary standpoint. If this were such a great way to run a company don't you think you'd see more successful companies doing this besides Valve?