Please answer the case study questions in the end

Can an Technology Replace Managers?

Start-up companies are known for being innovative,

and one of those innovations appears to be the way

they are being managed. A number of these new

firms are trying to minimize headcount and maxi-

mize agility by eliminating management hierarchy.

In place of managers, they're turning to technol-

ogy, including user-friendly software and low-cost

web-based services such as Amazon.com 's Redshift

for storing corporate data, analyzing the data, and

presenting the results in the form of dashboards

that anyone in the firm can use. In the past such

data were difficult to obtain, required more senior

managers to organize and interpret, or could not be

analyzed without expensive business intelligence

systems costing millions of dollars. Today even small

start-ups can afford to store and manipulate nearly

limitless pools of data in near real time.

For example, Chubbies, a rapidly growing clothing

start-up targeting college fraternities, doesn't have a

CEO. Instead, it has four co-CEOs, each in charge of

his or her own business function. This structure is

repeated all the way down the company's hierarchy.

All Chubbies employees have access to the same data

as its top managers. According to Tom Montgomery,

one of the Chubbies co-CEOs, when you don't have

a traditional CEO and final decision maker, you have

to trust people to make the right decisions based on

the information they see. Although it takes time to

build up that trust, once you do, the company can

move much more quickly.

Montgomery points out that in the past, an associ-

ate specializing in events for clients might report to

a manager in the marketing department in charge of

thinking about why the company should be throw-

ing events in the first place. Today, the event plan-

ner working alone can use an array of dashboards to

determine exactly how many Facebook likes, Insta-

gram posts, and sales arose from a particular event,

and she is able to decide on her own whether future

events should be scheduled. With the right data and

tools to back up her decision, she doesn't need a

manager to validate her choices.

Web retailer Zappos.com Inc. announced in 2013

that it was eliminating managers in order to keep

the 1,500-person company from becoming too rigid,

too unwieldy, and too bureaucratic as it grows.

Zappos adopted a "holocracy" model in which work-

ers manage themselves without the aid of middle

managers. In contrast to a traditional corporate

chain of command, holocracy organizes the busi-

ness as a series of overlapping, self-governing

" circles. " Instead of having jobs, holocracies have

"roles." Each role belongs to a circle rather than

a department. The circles overlap, and individu-

als hold many different roles. Individuals assigned

roles in these circles work together, and their meet-

ing outcomes are recorded using web-based soft-

ware called Glass Frog. This system allows anyone

in the company to view who's responsible for what

role and what they're working on. Glass Frog pro-

vides a "to-do" list that teams use to define the work

they're supposed to be doing and to hold themselves

accountable for those tasks.

Although Zappos CEO Tony Hsieh continues to

trumpet self-management, it is unclear if employees

widely share his enthusiasm. Some employees wel-

comed the opportunity for more independence. With

experience and expertise downplayed, less senior

employees with fresh ideas receive more attention.

Introverts have benefited from the expectation that

everybody speak in meetings. Other employees were

confused and frustrated by numerous mandates,

endless meetings, and uncertainty about who did

what. To whom would they report to if there were

no bosses? What was expected of them if they did

not have a job title, and how would they be compen-

sated? Within weeks after Zappos embraced holoc-

racy, about 14 percent of employees had left the

company. The employee exodus has continued. Zap-

pos's turnover rate for 2015 was 30 percent, 10 per-

centage points above its typical annual attrition rate.

Treehouse Island Inc., a Portland, Oregon, online

coding school, also had a flat organization. Staff

worked four-day weeks, worked only on projects they

liked, rarely had to send e-mail, and had no direct

bosses. However, the business grew, with about

100,000 students enrolled in its online courses and

100 employees. Some projects weren't being com-

pleted, and employees were unsure of their responsi-

bilities. Treehouse wasn't burdened by bureaucracy,

but work still stalled nevertheless. Without managers

to coordinate projects and supervise and encourage

workers, Treehouse employees weren't as produc-

tive as they could have been. According to Treehouse

founder Ryan Carson, there was no real reason to

work hard because no one knew about it. Some of

Treehouse's best employees started believing that notas much was expected of them. Questions about which subjects to teach would

spark much analysis and chatter but resulted in

few answers or plans. Michael Watson, who headed

Treehouse finance and operations, estimated that

decisions about matters such as Treehouse's website

design took twice as long as they should have.

Treehouse partially reversed course in the spring

of 2015. Employees still work four-day weeks, but

they now have managers. Since that change was

made, revenue has increased along with the number

of minutes of video courses the company produces.

The time required for customer support employ-

ees to respond to students who have questions

has dropped to three and a half hours from sevenhours. With roles now clearly defined and managers

tracking assignments, e-mail is actually enhancing

productivity.

According to Quy Huy, professor of strategy at the

Singapore campus of the prestigious graduate busi-

ness school Insead, middle managers are often vili-

fied as symptoms of corporate bloat, but things fall

apart without them.

CASE STUDY QUESTIONS

1. How do flat organizations differ from traditional

bureaucratic hierarchies?

2. How has information technology made it possible

to eliminate middle manager positions?

3. What management, organization, and technology

issues would you consider if you wanted to move from a traditional bureaucracy to a flatter

Organization?

4. Can technology replace managers? Explain your

answer.