In-House Training for Holacracy: Building Your Own Programs

An internal training program is the key to sustainable Holacracy implementation. External trainings are valuable but expensive and don’t scale. However, before you invest in an in-house program, you should know an important finding from research: Training alone isn’t enough.

Research on organizational transformation consistently shows: Training is necessary but not sufficient for successful implementation [1]. Organizations must create five structural prerequisites before training becomes effective. This article shows how to set up both correctly.

Why In-House Training?

Scalability with Limitations

External trainings cost per participant. In-house training scales – once developed, you can train any number of people.

However, the math only works if:

• Your organization has at least 50 employees
• You’re planning for a 3+ year horizon
• You invest in trainer development (6-12 months)
• You factor in hidden costs: opportunity costs, curriculum maintenance, quality assurance

Research on learning and development in digital transformation shows: Many organizations underestimate the depth and effort of organizational change [2]. This applies to training programs as well.

Contextuality as a Real Advantage

An internal program can use your specific circle structure, your roles, your governance history. This makes learning more relevant.

Important: Contextual knowledge alone doesn’t make a good trainer. Internal experts need additional pedagogical competence – adult learning, engagement design, transfer facilitation [3].

The Hybrid Model as Optimum

Research shows: Neither purely internal nor purely external is optimal. The hybrid model combines:

• Internal trainers for context and embedded support
• External trainers for pedagogical expertise and fresh perspectives

Organizations that have internal trainers formally certified achieve the strongest results [1].

The Structural Prerequisites

Before you invest in training: Do you have the five success prerequisites?

Prerequisite	What It Means	Check Question
Value alignment	Organizational culture fits self-organization	Is personal responsibility already lived?
Time and budget	18+ months until stabilization	Do we have patience for the learning curve?
Role clarity	Clear definitions despite distributed authority	Can we define roles cleanly?
Technology	Tools for coordination and transparency	Do we have a suitable system?
Leadership commitment	Leaders live autonomy principles	Do leaders really give up control?

These prerequisites aren’t training topics – they’re change management and organizational design [1]. Training cannot replace them.

The Three Training Levels

Level 1: Basic Participants

Target Group: All circle members

Learning Goals:

• Understand Holacracy fundamentals
• Participate constructively as a circle member
• Recognize and raise tensions
• Understand the IDM process from participant perspective

Scope: 4-6 hours

Format: Workshop with exercises

Research Insight: Game-based learning is particularly effective for understanding governance mechanisms [3]. A board game approach (“Little Bookcase Publications”) shows: Learners who simulate Holacracy processes through play understand the mechanics better than through pure knowledge transfer.

Limitation: Games convey procedures, not the emotional and political dimensions of real meetings. Supplement game-based learning with observation of real governance meetings.

Level 2: Facilitator Training

Target Group: Designated facilitators

Learning Goals:

• Lead governance meetings independently
• Facilitate tactical meetings
• Perform interventions
• Test objections

Scope: 16-24 hours distributed over several days

Format: Theory, exercises, supervision

Critical Success Factor: Research on transitioning from traditional to holacratic systems shows: Facilitator competence is decisive for implementation success [1]. Organizations that invest early in facilitator training reach productive meetings faster.

For details see Facilitator Training in Holacracy.

Level 3: Trainer Training

Target Group: Internal trainers who train others

Learning Goals:

• Conduct basic training independently
• Accompany facilitator training
• Adapt training materials
• Assess learning progress

Scope: Additional 16-24 hours plus practice

Format: Didactics workshop, accompanied trainings

Research Insight: Trainers need three competency fields [2], [4]:

1. Subject expertise – Deep Holacracy knowledge
2. Pedagogical competence – Adult learning, transfer facilitation
3. Organizational competence – Understanding of political and cultural dynamics

Subject experts without pedagogical training produce inconsistent results. Invest in train-the-trainer programs.

Developing the In-House Curriculum

Step 1: Assessment

Questions:

• What prior knowledge already exists?
• What internal resources (time, budget, expertise) do we have?
• What training formats fit our culture?
• How many people need to be trained in what timeframe?

Step 2: Compile Core Materials

Basic Training Materials:

• Introduction presentation (core concepts)
• Exercise scenarios for governance and tactical meetings
• Glossary of Holacracy terms
• Quick references for meetings

Game-Based Elements: Simulations where participants make governance decisions before experiencing real meetings [3].

Digital Resources:

• Recorded example meetings
• Interactive quizzes
• Reference cards for smartphones

Step 3: Identify and Develop Trainers

Requirements Profile for Internal Trainers:

• Experience as facilitator (at least 6 months)
• Interest in knowledge transfer
• Willingness for pedagogical further education
• Credibility in the organization

Development Path:

1. Formal facilitator certification (external recommended)
2. Basic pedagogical training (adult education)
3. Accompanied trainings under supervision
4. Independent delivery with feedback

Research on the role of middle management shows: Trainers often find themselves in a “Bermuda Triangle” between leadership expectations, implementation requirements, and behavioral change [4]. Give them clear roles and support.

Step 4: Pilot and Iterate

Select Pilot Group:

• 10-15 participants
• Mix of experienced and new
• Feedback-oriented culture

After Each Pilot:

• Collect systematic feedback
• Adjust materials
• Conduct trainer reflection

Building Support Structures

Beyond Training: The Organizational Prerequisites

Research clearly shows: Even excellent training fails without organizational support [1].

What You Must Establish Parallel to Training:

1. Coaching structure: Experienced facilitators as contacts for questions
2. Practice spaces: Regular opportunities to practice new skills
3. Error tolerance: Culture that accepts learning mistakes
4. Leadership role models: Leaders who visibly learn themselves

The Role of Middle Management

Research shows: Middle management is decisive for implementation success – and simultaneously most at risk [4].

Three Perspectives on Middle Management:

1. No longer needed (radical)
2. Insufficient potential (cynical)
3. Unique bridge position between leadership and operational level (realistic)

Implication for Training: Managers need specific support for their identity transformation. Don’t treat them as a problem, but as critical allies.

Using Game-Based Learning Correctly

Research on game-based Holacracy learning shows clear advantages – but also limitations [3].

What Games Do Well

• Convey governance mechanics: Practice procedural workflows
• Low-threshold entry: Access complexity through play
• Increase engagement: Active learning more effective than passive knowledge transfer

What Games Cannot Do

• Simulate political dynamics: Real career risks and power struggles are missing
• Represent emotional dimension: When roles are eliminated, it’s not a game
• Guarantee transfer: Game competence ≠ practical competence

Recommendation: Use games for basic training (Level 1), but supplement with:

• Observation of real meetings
• Reflection sessions after first practical experiences
• Coaching for difficult situations

Measuring Success

Short-Term Indicators (0-3 Months)

• Participant satisfaction with training
• Knowledge tests passed
• First active participation in meetings

Medium-Term Indicators (3-12 Months)

• Quality of governance proposals
• Meeting efficiency (time per decision)
• Independent tension processing

Long-Term Indicators (12+ Months)

• Autonomous circle leadership without external support
• Trainer succession from internal ranks
• Cultural anchoring of self-organization

Warning Signs

• Training completed, but no behavioral change
• High turnover among trainees
• Increasing “governance debt” (meetings about meetings)

These signals point to structural problems, not training deficiencies.

Avoiding Common Mistakes

Mistake 1: Training Without Structure

Problem: Investing in training but ignoring organizational prerequisites.

Solution: First check the five prerequisites, then plan training.

Mistake 2: Internal Experts as Trainers

Problem: Subject experts without pedagogical training produce poor training results.

Solution: Invest in train-the-trainer – external certification or basic pedagogical training.

Mistake 3: Games as Substitute for Practice

Problem: Game-based training creates false sense of security.

Solution: Combine games + real meeting observation + coaching.

Mistake 4: Underestimating Costs

Problem: Only calculating direct costs, ignoring hidden costs.

Solution: Full cost accounting: Development (6-12 months), opportunity costs, maintenance, quality assurance.

Resources and Next Steps

Where to Start?

1. Check structural prerequisites – Do you have the five success factors?
2. Make decision external vs. internal
3. Identify trainers and plan development path
4. Start pilot program with small group
5. Iterate based on feedback

Further Articles

• Facilitator Training in Holacracy
• External vs. Internal Facilitators
• Implementation Timeline
• Change Management in Self-Organization

---

Sources

[1] Pfister, A., Schwarz, P., & Wüthrich, C. (2021). “Change the way of working. Ways into self-organization with the use of Holacracy: An empirical investigation.” European Management Review, 18(4), 455-472. DOI: 10.1111/emre.12457 [Empirical Study | Sample: 43 interviews | Citations: 43 | Quality: 80/100]

[2] Erpenbeck, J., & Sauter, W. (2017). “Learning & Development in Times of Digital Transformation: Facilitating a Culture of Change and Innovation.” International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, 10(1), 23-32. DOI: 10.3991/ijac.v10i1.6334 [Conceptual Paper | Sample: Literature synthesis | Citations: 121 | Quality: 75/100]

[3] Treanor, M., & Lincicum, N. (2017). “Learning Holacracy Fundamentals Through Play.” Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity and Cognition. [Design Research | Sample: Game evaluation | Citations: 2 | Quality: 60/100]

[4] Hirschfeld, R., & Michel, L. (2020). “The Role of Middle Management in Continuous Improvement: The Bermuda Triangle of Leadership, Implementation and Behavioral Change.” Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 21(1), 87-102. DOI: 10.15640/jmpp.v8n1a5 [Conceptual Paper | Sample: Literature synthesis | Citations: 6 | Quality: 68/100]

[5] Scharnhorst, A., & Masselink, L. (2019). “Radically Self-Organized - Learnings from Transformation Towards Holacracy.” Academy of Management Proceedings, 2019(1), 10587. DOI: 10.5465/ambpp.2019.10587abstract [Case Study | Sample: 5 Swiss organizations | Citations: 1 | Quality: 65/100]

---

Research Methodology

This analysis is based on a systematic evaluation of studies on organizational transformation and Holacracy implementation from the SI Labs research database (655 papers). The cited studies were selected according to the following criteria:

• Thematic relevance: Focus on training, learning design, or implementation success
• Empirical basis: Preference for studies with concrete data
• Recency: Studies from the last 10 years preferred
• Methodological quality: Clear research designs

Limitations: Research on Holacracy training is limited. Some insights are transferred from general training research, which may limit transferability.

---

Disclosure

SI Labs has practiced Holacracy since 2015 and has developed its own in-house training program. Our perspective is that of a practitioner, not a neutral observer. We do not offer external training services – our interest is that organizations make the right decision for them, whether that’s internal or external.