Holacracy in Practice: What We Can Learn from Zappos, Buurtzorg, and Mercedes-Benz

Holacracy is often discussed in abstract terms: roles, circles, governance meetings. But what does it look like in practice? Which companies have adopted Holacracy, and what can we learn from their experiences?

This article presents the most important case studies from our analysis of 655 academic papers. We examine Zappos (the most famous case), Buurtzorg (healthcare), Mercedes-Benz.io (automotive), Medium (publishing), and supplement these with our own experience at SI Labs.

The case studies show: Holacracy is not a panacea, but it can work. Success depends on context.

The Research Landscape: 47 Documented Cases

Our analysis identifies 47 documented Holacracy implementations in academic literature. These cases span various industries and company sizes:

Sector	Number of Cases	Success Rate
Technology/IT	19	74%
Consulting/Services	11	82%
Retail	6	50%
Healthcare	5	80%
Manufacturing	4	50%
Non-Profit	2	100%

Research Insight: The tech sector dominates with 40% of all documented cases, but the highest success rates appear in consulting firms (82%) and healthcare organizations (80%). The retail sector (Zappos) shows mixed results. (Source: SI Labs Case Study Analysis, 47 Cases)

Zappos: The Retail Giant as Laboratory

Overview

Company: Zappos (Online shoe and clothing retailer) Size: 1,500+ employees Implementation: 2014 Industry: E-Commerce/Retail Status: Modified (partially scaled back after 2020) Academic Studies: 5+ papers

Zappos is the most well-known and discussed Holacracy implementation. As a 100% subsidiary of Amazon, CEO Tony Hsieh turned the transformation into a public experiment.

Timeline

January 2014: Tony Hsieh announces the introduction of Holacracy. Zappos becomes the largest organization to implement full Holacracy.

March 2015: “The Offer” is activated. Zappos offers all employees a generous severance package if they do not want to work in a holacratic organization. 18% (approximately 270 employees) accept the offer.

2015-2017: Zappos navigates through growing pains. Ongoing turnover stabilizes at approximately 14% annualized.

2020: Following Tony Hsieh’s death, Zappos begins modifying elements of the Holacracy structure.

Academic Insights

Research on Zappos is nuanced:

“Holacracy – the future of organizing? The case of Zappos” (2018, 27 citations): The study argues that “the potential of holarchical structures will be fruitful only if the structure-culture fit is achieved.” At Zappos, this fit was challenging because the existing culture was strongly CEO-centric.

“Beyond the Holacracy Hype” (2016, 61 citations): Harvard Business Review analyzes Zappos and other cases, warning: “Most observers who have written about holacracy take extreme positions, either celebrating these ‘bossless,’ ‘flat’ work environments or denouncing them as naive experiments.”

“Evaluation of Implementing Holacracy” (2017, 8 citations): This study documents the challenges at Zappos: coordination complexity at scale, the tension between Holacracy and Amazon reporting requirements, and the difficulty of transitioning 1,500+ people simultaneously.

What We Can Learn

1. Size is a factor. At 1,500+ employees, Holacracy encounters complexity limits. Coordinating between hundreds of circles requires substantial resources.

2. “The Offer” was strategically smart. The 18% departures are often cited as failure, but Zappos actively made it easy to leave. That was more realistic than expecting everyone to participate.

3. Leadership commitment must be sustainable. Tony Hsieh was the driving force. After his death, that force was missing, and the structure was modified.

4. Structure-culture fit is critical. Zappos had a strong culture (known for “Delivering Happiness”), but this culture was oriented around Tony Hsieh, not distributed authority.

Buurtzorg: Self-Organization in Healthcare

Overview

Company: Buurtzorg (home care) Size: 12,000+ nurses (2023) Implementation: 2006 Industry: Healthcare Status: Active and growing Academic Studies: 2 direct, multiple references

Buurtzorg is a Dutch home care company founded by Jos de Blok. It does not use Holacracy in the strict sense, but rather a related self-organized model often referred to as the “Buurtzorg model.”

The Model

Buurtzorg organizes nurses into self-organized teams of 10-12 people. These teams:

• Plan their own work
• Make decisions together
• Have no managers in the traditional sense
• Are supported (not supervised) by regional coaches

The model deliberately avoids bureaucracy. The headquarters in Almelo has only about 50 employees for 12,000+ nurses.

Academic Insights

“Opportunities and challenges for home care services implementing the Buurtzorg model in Switzerland” (2022, 1 citation): This study examines the transferability of the Buurtzorg model to Switzerland. It identifies key success factors:

• Strong professionalism among employees
• Clear purpose (patient-centeredness)
• Minimal bureaucracy
• Supportive (not controlling) structures

What We Can Learn

1. Healthcare is suited for self-organization. The high professionalism of nurses and the clear purpose (patient well-being) enable distributed decision-making.

2. Scaling is possible. From 4 nurses (2006) to 12,000+ (2023) demonstrates that self-organized models can scale when the basic structure is right.

3. Minimal headquarters is a feature. The deliberate decision not to build a large administration forces decentralization.

4. Sector adaptation is important. The Buurtzorg model was developed for healthcare, not adopted as a generic framework.

Mercedes-Benz.io: Holacracy in the Automotive Context

Overview

Company: Mercedes-Benz.io (Digital unit) Size: ~300 employees Implementation: 2016 Industry: Automotive/Digital Status: Active Academic Studies: 2 papers (23 + 1 citations)

Mercedes-Benz.io is a 100% subsidiary of Mercedes-Benz AG that develops digital products and services. As a “greenfield” within a traditional corporation, it offers an interesting study subject.

Academic Insights

“How Mercedes-Benz addresses digital transformation using Holacracy” (2021, 23 citations): This study examines why Mercedes-Benz.io chose Holacracy and how it works:

Why Holacracy:

• Need to respond quickly to digital changes
• Desire for agility that traditional corporate structures cannot provide
• Separation from the “parent structure” as a deliberate strategy

How it works:

• Circle structure for different product areas
• Governance meetings for continuous adaptation
• Integration with Scrum/Agile methods
• Clear interfaces to Mercedes-Benz AG

Challenges:

• Communication with the corporation, which has traditional structures
• External partners’ expectations for conventional contacts
• Balance between Holacracy purity and pragmatic adaptations

What We Can Learn

1. The subsidiary model can work. A self-organized unit within a traditional corporation is possible but requires clear interfaces.

2. Digital context favors Holacracy. The requirements of digital product development (speed, iteration, cross-functional teams) fit well with Holacracy.

3. “Greenfield” reduces resistance. Mercedes-Benz.io was founded with Holacracy from the start; that is easier than converting existing structures.

4. Integration is an ongoing task. The interface to the corporation remains challenging and requires continuous work.

Medium: From Pioneer to Hybrid

Overview

Company: Medium (Publishing platform) Size: ~100-150 employees (varying) Implementation: 2013 (early adopter) Industry: Tech/Publishing Status: Modified (hybrid model) Academic Studies: Multiple references

Medium, founded by Twitter co-founder Evan Williams, was one of the first well-known Holacracy adopters and received considerable attention.

Timeline

2013: Medium introduces Holacracy. Williams states: “[Holacracy] creates clarity: who is in charge of what, and who makes each kind of decision.”

2013-2016: Medium practices Holacracy and is frequently cited as a success story.

2016: Medium begins modifying Holacracy and reintroducing elements of traditional structures.

2016+: Medium uses a hybrid model that retains elements of Holacracy but also introduces traditional management roles.

Academic Insights

The Medium case study shows a pattern that research calls “Holacracy Retreat”:

1. Enthusiastic adoption: Organization adopts Holacracy fully
2. Practice phase: 2-4 years of productive use
3. Friction points: Specific challenges become visible
4. Modification: Adaptation to a hybrid model

This is not necessarily failure. It shows that organizations learn and adapt.

What We Can Learn

1. Early adopters had fewer templates. Medium experimented without the case studies available today.

2. Hybrid models are legitimate. Not every organization needs “pure” Holacracy. Adopting and adapting elements is a valid path.

3. Time-limited use is not failure. If Holacracy works for 3 years and is then modified, it was not in vain.

4. Tech startups are experimental. The willingness to try new things (and adapt) is part of tech culture.

SI Labs: Ten Years of Experience

Overview

Company: SI Labs (Service Design Consultancy) Size: ~30 employees Implementation: 2014 Industry: Consulting Status: Active (with adaptations) Academic Studies: None external (this documentation)

At SI Labs, we have been practicing Holacracy for over ten years. You can find our detailed experience in our separate article on Holacracy at SI Labs.

Brief Summary

What works:

• Rapid role adjustments when requirements change
• Distributed decision-making accelerates client projects
• Transparency through documented roles and domains
• Personal responsibility as a cultural principle

What we have adapted:

• More frequent, shorter governance meetings
• Asynchronous governance for simple changes
• Integrated retrospectives
• Flexible cross-links

Our learnings:

• Training before introduction is critical
• The 6-month crisis is normal and surmountable
• Not everyone fits with self-organization
• Continuous adaptation is part of the system

Recognizing Patterns: What Successful Implementations Have in Common

From the analysis of all case studies, patterns emerge:

Company Size

Size	Success Rate	Notes
< 50 employees	85%	Optimal for Holacracy
50-250 employees	70%	Works with adaptations
250-500 employees	55%	Critical threshold
> 500 employees	40%	Significant complexity

Research identifies 250-500 employees as a critical threshold. Above this size, coordination complexity increases exponentially.

Industry Patterns

High success rate:

• Consulting/Services (82%)
• Healthcare (80%)
• Tech/IT (74%)

Mixed results:

• Retail (50%)
• Manufacturing (50%)

The patterns show: Industries with highly skilled employees and clear purpose favor self-organization.

Leadership Patterns

Successful implementations show:

• Genuine leadership commitment (not just signatures)
• Leaders willing to give up power
• Sustainable support over years, not just during introduction

Timeline Patterns

The typical Holacracy journey:

Months 1-6: Learning phase, many mistakes, frustration Months 6-12: “Adoption Valley,” some organizations give up here Months 12-18: Stabilization, first productivity gains Years 2-3: Efficiency improvements, adaptations are made Year 4+: System becomes the “new normal”

Decision Guide: Is Holacracy Right for Your Organization?

Based on the case studies, you can use the following questions for self-assessment:

Size and Structure

• We have fewer than 250 employees, or we are planning a contained rollout
• Our current structure is not heavily regulated (e.g., by collective agreements)
• We can withstand a 12-18 month learning phase

Culture and People

• Initiative already exists in our culture
• Our employees want more personal responsibility
• Feedback is normal and accepted in our culture
• We have or can develop competent facilitators

Leadership

• Leadership is willing to give up power
• Leadership will not revert to old patterns when difficulties arise
• There is a champion who drives the implementation

Resources

• We have budget for training and possibly external support
• We have time for the learning phase
• We can exercise patience (it will get harder before it gets better)

Evaluation:

• 10+ checks: Good prerequisites for Holacracy
• 7-9 checks: Possible with limitations; work on the gaps
• < 7 checks: Holacracy is probably not the right path now; work on prerequisites first

Conclusion: Learning from Those Who Have Tried

The case studies show: Holacracy is not a magic solution, but it can work. Context determines success.

Zappos shows the limits of scaling and the importance of sustainable leadership.

Buurtzorg shows that self-organization thrives with highly professional teams and clear purpose.

Mercedes-Benz.io shows that Holacracy is possible in corporate structures when the unit is clearly defined.

Medium shows that hybrid models can be a legitimate outcome.

SI Labs shows that long-term practice with continuous adaptation leads to success.

The most important lesson: Learn from others, but do not copy blindly. Every organization is different. Use the case studies as orientation, not as a blueprint.

---

This article is part of our series on Holacracy. Further articles: Holacracy: A Practitioner’s Guide, Implementing Holacracy, Holacracy at SI Labs, Holacracy vs. Sociocracy, Why Holacracy Fails.

This article is based on an analysis of 655 academic papers on Holacracy and self-organization (2012-2025), with a special focus on 47 documented implementation cases.