Article
Self-OrganizationOne-on-Ones in Self-Organization: Personal Conversations Without Hierarchy
Do you need one-on-ones in Holacracy? Yes – but differently. How personal conversations work in self-organized teams.
“If there’s no boss, who does the one-on-ones?” This question comes up in every Holacracy introduction. The answer surprises: One-on-ones might be more important in self-organization than in traditional structures – just designed differently.
At SI Labs, we conduct regular one-on-ones. Not because a manager demands it, but because they fulfill needs that no other format covers.
Why One-on-Ones Matter Even Without Hierarchy
What Holacracy Meetings Don’t Cover
Tactical Meetings coordinate work. Governance Meetings clarify structure.
But neither Tactical nor Governance asks:
- How are you as a person?
- What are your development goals?
- Is there feedback you need?
- Is your workload sustainable?
- Do you still fit the organization?
These questions are personal, not structural or operational. They need a protected space.
The Human Dimension
Holacracy separates person and role. That’s useful for clear accountability. But people are not roles:
- People have feelings, roles don’t
- People develop, roles get adjusted
- People need relationships, roles are functions
One-on-ones create space for the human dimension.
Research Insight: Studies show that regular one-on-ones increase employee satisfaction by 30% and retention by 25% – regardless of organizational structure. Personal contact is the decisive factor. [1]
Research Insight: Empirical research on teal organizations shows that employee satisfaction in self-organized companies with friendly work environments, flat structures, and empowerment is significantly higher. Matějová et al. (2019) found: “Workers empowerment, relationships, self-management – each of those on its own is considered to improve work satisfaction.” This confirms why one-on-ones remain important as a relationship-nurturing practice in Holacracy. [3]
One-on-Ones in Self-Organization: Three Models
Model 1: Lead Link One-on-Ones
Who: Lead Link with Circle members
Focus:
- Role fit: Does the person fit the role?
- Development: What does the person need to improve?
- Feedback: What’s going well, what isn’t?
- Workload: Is the load sustainable?
Frequency: Every 2-4 weeks
Why it makes sense: The Lead Link has the accountability for role assignment. They need information about role fit.
Caution: This is not a classic manager conversation. The Lead Link assigns roles but doesn’t direct content.
Model 2: Peer One-on-Ones
Who: Two roles that work closely together
Focus:
- Relationship quality: How is our collaboration?
- Feedback: What can I do better?
- Alignment: Is there friction we’re not addressing?
Frequency: Monthly or as needed
Why it makes sense: Tactical Meetings coordinate work but don’t clarify relationships.
Model 3: Development One-on-Ones
Who: Person with someone who supports development (mentor, coach, HR)
Focus:
- Career: Where do you want to go?
- Skills: What do you want to learn?
- Fit: Do you still fit the organization?
Frequency: Monthly or quarterly
Why it makes sense: Holacracy has no built-in career development. This need must be met separately.
Agenda Elements for One-on-Ones
Human Check-in
Like meeting check-ins, but more personal:
- How are you really?
- What’s on your mind?
- What’s happened since last time?
Role Reflection
For each role the person holds:
- How does the role feel?
- Is there overload or underutilization?
- Does the role still fit?
Feedback Exchange
Bidirectional:
- What do I appreciate about you?
- What would I wish were different?
- What feedback do you have for me?
Development
- What do you want to learn?
- What support do you need?
- What opportunities do you see?
Open Topics
- Is there something you want to bring up?
- Something that doesn’t fit other formats?
One-on-Ones vs. Holacracy Formats
| Topic | Where? |
|---|---|
| Operational coordination | Tactical |
| Structural questions | Governance |
| Personal wellbeing | One-on-One |
| Feedback on the person | One-on-One |
| Development wishes | One-on-One |
| Role fit | One-on-One |
| Relationship clarification | One-on-One or peer conversation |
One-on-Ones at SI Labs
Our approach:
Lead Link Conversations
Every 3-4 weeks, 30-45 minutes:
- Check-in: How are you?
- Role check: How do your roles feel?
- Feedback: What’s going well, what isn’t?
- Development: What do you need?
Peer Conversations
As needed, self-organized:
- When friction is noticeable
- When a relationship needs attention
- Nobody needs to ask if they’re “allowed”
What We’ve Learned
1. One-on-ones don’t replace meetings They supplement. Operational tensions belong in Tactical, not one-on-ones.
2. Structure helps Even without a manager, one-on-ones need some regularity. Otherwise they don’t happen.
3. Feedback is maintenance People need feedback. In self-organization, you must actively seek it because there are no annual reviews.
4. The human side counts Holacracy is efficient, but people aren’t machines. One-on-ones are the counterbalance.
Research Insight: The largest empirical study on Holacracy transformations (Pfister et al., 2021) identifies the missing manager-employee relationship as a central challenge: “The transformation brings with it various challenges, especially for employees and teams that need to be resolved.” One-on-ones can fill this relationship vacuum – not as a hierarchy replacement, but as a deliberate investment in the human dimension. [4]
Common Objections
”We have no manager for one-on-ones”
Answer: One-on-ones don’t need a manager. Lead Links, peers, or dedicated roles (People Partner, mentor) can lead them.
”That’s hierarchical”
Answer: A conversation isn’t hierarchical just because it’s between two people. Hierarchy comes from power, not format.
”We don’t have time for that”
Answer: 30 minutes every 2-4 weeks. The investment pays off through better relationships, earlier problem detection, and higher satisfaction.
”In Holacracy we speak to roles, not people”
Answer: In meetings, yes. But people have needs beyond their roles. One-on-ones address the person, not the role.
Conclusion: People Need Conversations
Holacracy structures work efficiently. But work is done by people. People need:
- Feedback
- Development
- Relationship
- To be heard
One-on-ones fulfill these needs in a way that Tactical and Governance cannot. They’re not a contradiction to self-organization – they’re its necessary complement.
Research Methodology
This article is based on research on employee leadership and development, empirical research on self-organizing companies, and experience at SI Labs.
Source selection:
- Research on one-on-one effectiveness (Gallup)
- Empirical studies on Teal and Holacracy (Matějová, Pfister)
- Holacracy community discussions
- Own practice
Limitations:
- Little research on one-on-ones specifically in Holacracy
- Context-dependence
Disclosure
SI Labs GmbH conducts regular one-on-ones to supplement our Holacracy meetings.
Sources
[1] Gallup. “State of the American Manager: Analytics and Advice for Leaders.” Gallup, Inc., 2015. [Survey Report | Large Sample | Citations: 500+ | Quality: 75/100]
[2] 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]
[3] Matějová, Lenka. “Job Satisfaction in the Context of Teal Organization.” Acta Universitatis Nicolai Copernici. Zarządzanie 47 (2020): 143-152. DOI: 10.12775/aunc_zarz.2020.012 [Field Research | Pilot Research | Citations: 2 | Quality: 65/100]
[4] Pfister, Susanne, and Thomas Nesper. “Change the Way of Working: Ways into Self-organization with the Use of Holacracy.” European Management Review 18, no. 4 (2021): 405-420. DOI: 10.1111/emre.12457 [Field Research | n=43 Interviews | Citations: 43 | Quality: 78/100]