Rotation: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
# Not always is the best person suitable for the job doing that work. | # Not always is the best person suitable for the job doing that work. | ||
# Neither are you always doing the thing you like the most. | # Neither are you always doing the thing you like the most. | ||
# No free choice | |||
# Jeopardization of specialisation | |||
==Upsides== | ==Upsides== |
Revision as of 18:59, 21 August 2011
Rotation is a basic organising principle where different participants take up rotating roles. For example, first person 'A' is the co-ordinator and person 'B' is taking care of the outreach. Then later on it reverses. Like this everyone can learn the skills needed.
Downsides
- Not always is the best person suitable for the job doing that work.
- Neither are you always doing the thing you like the most.
- No free choice
- Jeopardization of specialisation
Upsides
- Everyone can learn the skills needed to perfom the actions
- The organisation has a whole will progress as empathy and understanding is higher of other functions
- No-one will get attached to a certain function
Variations
- Participants can subscribe for certain functions, not all, so that downside 2 is taking into account
- Rotating doesn't happen suddenly, with enough participants person 'A' can first work together with person 'B' on the same function, until person 'B' reached the level needed to perform the function well enough
Examples
Food-cooperatives are often organised according to rotating principles. Also, in the old Greek 'democracies' rotation by lot took place for citizens to take different roles of administrator.
Links
- Introducing the … Klerotarians: reviving democracy the Athenian way The Kleroterians are an informal group which aims to reinvigorate this tradition of deliberate use of randomness (lottery) in human affairs. In the world of governance, politics and elections, this is called Sortition.