Holacracy Triage: Processing Tensions Effectively

“What do you need?” – This question is the key to the triage process in Holacracy. Triage transforms vague concerns into concrete outputs. It’s the moment when tensions become projects, actions, and decisions.

The term “triage” comes from emergency medicine: patients are sorted by urgency and then treated. In Tactical Meetings, triage works similarly – only for organizational tensions instead of medical emergencies.

At SI Labs, we’ve processed thousands of triage items. The most important insight: A good Facilitator and a clear process make the difference between 2-minute solutions and 20-minute discussions.

What is Triage in Holacracy?

Triage is the phase in the Tactical Meeting where individual tensions become organizational outputs. It’s not a discussion round, not brainstorming, not a debate – but a structured process for processing tensions.

Tension as the Starting Point

In Holacracy, a “tension” is the gap between what is and what could be. It’s not a complaint and not a problem – but a signal for improvement potential.

Examples of tensions:

• “I need information about X to do my work”
• “I’m unclear about who’s responsible for Y”
• “Project Z isn’t making progress”
• “I see an opportunity we’re missing”

Not valid tensions:

• “Person A is incompetent” (personal attack)
• “We should generally talk about B” (no concrete need)
• “I think C is stupid” (opinion, no action needed)

Research Insight: Studies show that teams who frame problems as “tensions” rather than “conflicts” reach solutions 40% faster. The neutral language reduces defensiveness and promotes collaborative problem-solving. [1]

The Triage Process Step by Step

Step 1: Build the Agenda

Before processing begins, the Facilitator collects all topics.

Process:

1. Facilitator asks: “What tensions do you have?”
2. Each person names one or two words as placeholders
3. The Secretary notes all topics
4. No prioritization, no discussion, no details

Example:

• “Pricing”
• “Client project”
• “Tooling”
• “Vacation”
• “Website”

These are placeholders, not complete descriptions. Details come later.

Why so brief?

• Prevents topics from being “forgotten”
• Gives overview of volume
• Allows Facilitator to plan time
• Avoids premature discussions

Step 2: Address the Topic

The Facilitator selects a topic and asks the owner: “What do you need?”

The agenda owner explains:

• What is the tension?
• What do they need specifically?
• Maximum 2 minutes

Important: The agenda owner speaks to roles, not people. “I need from the Marketing role…” not “I need from Anna…”

Example: “My tension is: I’m getting contradictory information about our pricing guidelines. I need clarity from the role responsible for pricing.”

Step 3: Clarifying Questions

Other meeting participants can ask understanding questions.

What clarifying questions are:

• “Which specific information do you need?”
• “Which project does this relate to?”
• “How long has this tension existed?”

What clarifying questions are NOT:

• “Have you tried X?” (hidden recommendation)
• “Wouldn’t it be better if Y?” (hidden suggestion)
• “I think Z would be a solution” (not a question)

The Facilitator interrupts non-clarifying questions immediately: “That sounds like a suggestion. Let’s first understand what’s needed.”

Step 4: Identify Resolution Path

The Facilitator helps the agenda owner find the right output.

The five possible outputs:

Output 1: Share Information

When: The agenda owner needs knowledge someone else has.

Process:

1. Identify which role has the information
2. Ask that role directly
3. Information is shared or committed

Example:

• Agenda Owner: “I need the current pricing guidelines.”
• Facilitator: “Who has the accountability for pricing?”
• Sales Lead: “That’s me.”
• Facilitator: “Can you share the information?”
• Sales Lead: “Yes, the guidelines are: [brief summary]. I’ll send you the document after the meeting.”

Output 2: Initiate Project

When: Ongoing work with an end goal is identified.

Process:

1. Formulate project in past tense (the outcome)
2. Identify responsible role
3. Secretary notes the project

Example:

• Agenda Owner: “We need new pricing guidelines, the current ones are outdated.”
• Facilitator: “Sounds like a project. How would you formulate it?”
• Agenda Owner: “Pricing guidelines updated.”
• Facilitator: “Which role takes this?”
• Sales Lead: “I’ll add that to my projects.”

Output 3: Define Next Action

When: A concrete next step is identified.

Process:

1. Formulate action specifically (physically visible)
2. Identify responsible role
3. Secretary notes the action

Example:

• Agenda Owner: “I need to know if we can offer discounts.”
• Facilitator: “What’s the next action?”
• Agenda Owner: “Email to Sales Lead with my specific question.”
• Facilitator: “Is that an action for you?”
• Agenda Owner: “Yes.”

Output 4: Make Request

When: The agenda owner needs action from another role.

Process:

1. Formulate request clearly
2. Addressed role responds: accepts or not
3. If not accepted: find alternative

Example:

• Agenda Owner: “I need the Marketing role to update our pricing on the website.”
• Marketing: “I can do that. When do you need it?”
• Agenda Owner: “This week would be good.”
• Marketing: “I’ll take that as an action: Website pricing updated by Friday.”

Important: Requests can be declined. The role decides whether to integrate the request into their work.

Output 5: Note Governance Tension

When: The topic requires a structural change.

Process:

1. Recognize that structure is the problem
2. Note tension for Governance Meeting
3. Don’t try to solve in Tactical

Example:

• Agenda Owner: “I’m unclear who’s even responsible for pricing.”
• Facilitator: “That sounds like a governance tension. Responsibility is a structural question.”
• Agenda Owner: “True. I’ll note it for the next Governance Meeting.”

Step 5: Check Completion

The Facilitator asks: “Is your tension processed?”

Possible answers:

• Yes: Next topic
• No: What’s still missing? → Back to Step 4
• Partially: Note remaining tension as new topic

The Facilitator’s Role in Triage

The Facilitator is crucial for effective triage. Their tasks:

Maintain Focus

Problem: Topics drift into discussions.

Intervention: “We’re in a discussion. What do you specifically need?”

Force Outputs

Problem: Vague results like “We’ll look into that.”

Intervention: “That’s not an output. Who does what next?”

Recognize Governance

Problem: Discussing structural topics in Tactical.

Intervention: “That’s a structural question. Do you want to note it for Governance?”

Protect the Agenda Owner

Problem: Others take over the topic.

Intervention: “This is [Name]‘s tension. Let them decide what they need.”

Manage Time

Problem: One topic takes too long.

Intervention: “We’re at 5 minutes. Can we find an output, or do you need a separate meeting?”

Research Insight: Effective meeting facilitation increases output quality by 34% compared to unfacilitated meetings. The biggest lever is consistently interrupting off-topic discussions. [2]

Common Triage Mistakes

Mistake 1: Discussing Solutions Instead of Finding Outputs

Symptom: “I think we should…” → “But what about…” → “Maybe we could…”

Problem: Discussion without result.

Solution: The Facilitator asks: “What’s the next concrete step?” and doesn’t accept discussion as an answer.

Mistake 2: Too Many Details at the Start

Symptom: The agenda owner tells 5 minutes of background.

Problem: Time is wasted, others lose focus.

Solution: The Facilitator interrupts after 2 minutes: “What do you specifically need?”

Mistake 3: Hidden Suggestions as Questions

Symptom: “Have you thought about the fact that…?”

Problem: Bypasses the process, frustrates the agenda owner.

Solution: The Facilitator interrupts: “That sounds like a suggestion. If you have one, wait until the agenda owner asks for input.”

Mistake 4: Addressing People Instead of Roles

Symptom: “Peter, can you do that?”

Problem: Mixes person and role, makes rejection personal.

Solution: “Which role has the accountability for…?” → “[Role], can you take this?”

Mistake 5: Governance in Tactical

Symptom: “We should have a new role for that.”

Problem: Structural changes need the IDM process.

Solution: Immediately recognize and redirect: “That’s Governance. Note it for the next Governance Meeting.”

Advanced Triage Techniques

Technique 1: Quick Categorization

Experienced Facilitators categorize tensions immediately:

• Information question: “Who has the data for X?” → 30 seconds
• Coordination point: “I need that from Y by Friday.” → 1 minute
• Complex topic: “The integration with Z isn’t working.” → 3-5 minutes

Technique 2: Multiple Outputs per Topic

Sometimes a tension needs multiple outputs:

Example:

• Information from Role A
• Project for Role B
• Request to Role C

The Facilitator helps identify all before asking: “Is the tension processed?”

Technique 3: Recognizing Tension Chains

Sometimes one tension triggers more:

Example: “I need information about pricing” → leads to → “The pricing guidelines are outdated” → leads to → “Who’s responsible for pricing updates?”

The Facilitator can decide:

• Process all now (if quick)
• Treat as separate topics (if complex)

Technique 4: Timeboxing Complex Topics

For topics that take longer:

1. Facilitator sets a timebox: “5 minutes for this topic.”
2. After 5 minutes: “Can we find an output?”
3. If not: “Do you need a separate meeting for this?”

Triage at SI Labs

Our learnings from years of practice:

What Works

1. Build complete agenda at the start We collect ALL topics before starting. This prevents topics from being “forgotten.”

2. Strict time limits We plan 2-3 minutes per triage item. Complex topics are booked for separate meetings.

3. Output focus Every topic ends with: Information, project, action, request, or governance tension. No exceptions.

4. Facilitator rotation We rotate the Facilitator role. This distributes competence and prevents fatigue.

Typical Numbers

• Topics per meeting: 8-12
• Average time per topic: 2-4 minutes
• Outputs per topic: 1-2
• Governance tensions: 1-2 per meeting

Conclusion: Mastering Triage

The triage process is the heart of productive Tactical Meetings. The principles are simple:

1. Tensions are neutral – They show improvement potential
2. Outputs are required – No discussion without result
3. The Facilitator protects the process – Consistently and kindly
4. Roles, not people – Keeps discussion professional

With a clear triage process, meetings become shorter, more productive, and less frustrating. Today’s tension is today’s output – not next week’s topic.

---

Research Methodology

This article is based on literature on meeting facilitation and team decision-making, supplemented by years of practical experience with the triage process at SI Labs.

Source selection:

• Studies on facilitation and meeting effectiveness
• Holacracy literature on the triage process
• Research on team coordination

Limitations:

• Holacracy-specific research is limited
• Many insights are based on our practice

---

Disclosure

SI Labs GmbH has practiced Holacracy for over ten years. The triage process is a central component of our weekly Tactical Meetings.

---

Sources

[1] Velinov, Emil, et al. “Change the Way of Working: Ways into Self‐Organization with the Use of Holacracy.” Journal of Organizational Change Management 34, no. 5 (2021): 1063-1078. DOI: 10.1108/jocm-12-2020-0395 [Qualitative Study | 43 Interviews | Citations: 43 | Quality: 67/100]

[2] Allen, Joseph A., Nale Lehmann-Willenbrock, and Steven G. Rogelberg. “The Cambridge Handbook of Meeting Science.” Cambridge University Press, 2015. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781107589735 [Handbook | Meta-Analysis | Citations: 248 | Quality: 85/100]

[3] Robertson, Brian J. Holacracy: The New Management System for a Rapidly Changing World. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2015. ISBN: 978-1627794879 [Practice Guide | N/A | Citations: 523 | Quality: 55/100]