https://chatgpt.com/c/68b9e1c9-facc-832d-ac18-4096d9f79fc7 The minimalist version is just a few disciplined habits, not the whole constitution. The core Holacracy principles you can strip down are: 1. **Tensions as fuel**: teach everyone to notice a gap between “what is” and “what could be” and treat that as a legitimate reason to change structure or process, not just complain. 2. **Roles, not people**: explicitly write down roles with clear purposes and accountabilities, even if lightweight. When a tension arises, update the role description rather than negotiate with a person. 3. **Two meeting modes**: keep governance (roles/structure changes) separate from operations (projects/tasks). Even without formal facilitation, just enforcing that split avoids muddiness. 4. **Lightweight recording**: keep a single source of truth (doc, wiki, board) where current roles and accountabilities live. Update it in real time when tensions get processed. That’s the smallest set of practices that shift authority from personalities to process. You don’t need links, full integrative decision-making, or GlassFrog unless you want to scale beyond a handful of circles. The “lite” approach can be as simple as: - weekly 30 min governance check-in - update roles in a shared doc - keep tactical meetings free of structural debate - normalize the idea that anyone can surface a tension. ## "Roles, not people" in more detail Instead of saying _“Alex, you’re supposed to do this, why didn’t you?”_ you treat the issue as evidence that the role definition isn’t clear or sufficient. Example: A designer keeps being asked last-minute for marketing graphics. The tension isn’t “Designer isn’t responsive,” it’s “the Designer role doesn’t clearly say they’re responsible for marketing requests, or how those requests should be prioritized.” In governance, you’d propose a change: - Add to the **Designer** role: _“Provide marketing graphics with at least 3 business days’ lead time.”_ - Or create a new **Marketing Graphics** role with that accountability, maybe held by the same person. The conversation shifts from blaming or pleading with Alex → clarifying _what the role does._ Alex may still hold the role, but now expectations are explicit and written down. Over time, the organization becomes a living document of roles and accountabilities that evolves with tensions, instead of relying on memory or interpersonal negotiation.