Is there a chain of command? or is everyone equal? The higher the person is on the chain of command should receive more voting power.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Is there a chain of command? or is everyone equal? The higher the person is on the chain of command should receive more voting power.
I feel like there would still be politics within any group that gets paid the same amount @furion @bscot020, I feel that politicking would still exist because we would still have the few who would want to take control, and the sheeple who follow them. I've seen this happen in my own projects I've been forced into with other people... neat idea though, if I could vote on making that an actual system, I would be all for it. Keep it up! upvoted!
Yeah but theres people who think their shit dont stink and think theyre 100% correct everytime. I see it all the time in the corporate setting. The "If I get paid the same as you why should I follow your directions or listen to you?" People. Their would definitely have to be rewards/bonuses involved to have people driving the plane.
If the employee earns $1000 a month, his boss should earn $1025 a month. Problem solved, the worker no longer earns the same as the boss. :D
I love the idea. The only flaw I can see is what would motivate a staff member to excel and strive for an incentive without a financial reward (other than bonuses) in place? I understand pride in the project and work would be the primary attribute you’d be looking for, and you want the person to take pride and be exceptionally motivated of their own accord - but I can’t see a ‘permanent’ salary with no hope of that increasing as a viable option - even if their own project and therefore tokens increases in value over time
Without incentives we would eventually even run out of toilet paper. Why bother to innovate, to be more efficient, to work extra hours, to find new and better uses of the work hours, etc. SOCIALISM IS A DISASTER!
This is why I advise a democratic system in start-ups. The leader has to give a speech and petition, those who want to lead have to earn it, and those who don't want to lead get a say in who is chosen. Majority rules and that is life. All people will never be satisfied all the time, and that is totally fine.
Good question. If the person in leadership position is doing a good job, more people will dedicate their shares to that person, thus resulting in higher proportion of a bonus.
If a person on the 'top' does not receive sufficient votes, its an indication that he may not be doing a very good job.
Seems like it would work, also length of employment should be factored in
Length of employment is factored in implicitly, as people who worked together for longer are more likely to vote for each other. Veterans also likely have bigger role or stronger recognition in the organization.
People who join the team early also get more tokens during the first bonus rounds, because:
a.) The token is worth less, thus more tokens are given out.
b.) The team is smaller, so each person gets a bigger piece of the pie.
Got it. seems interesting for sure!
Furion do you think the Steemit Approach would work with the real world? Where the crowd decides who get what money?
This is how the decision about who gets what money is done on Steemit. Hint: it isn't the crowd.
The distribution of rewards on Steemit is decided by those that have the most Steem, and they keep it.
Can you elaborate a bit more on that or provide a link to where more info on this can be found?
Or he or she is not hot enough. :D
what about the time taken to work or taken by each positioned employees ??
The constant problem is the attraction of popularity. The higher in the foodchain or comment list the more likely you are to be heard and therefore the more likely t be voted up. Popularity breeds success not truth.
Thank you for writing this Article . It inspired me to write my own thoughts and dreams down.
how?
I don't believe in equal pay
no offense - IMHO - it would bring society down this way
seen it happened in my country
though I understand it when someone feels like - it should be so
and honestly I sometimes get upset casting my up
specially when the post sucks and didn't see it
but what sucks for me might be great to the others
so - still hard to weigh
Great post and many great points though
Why? Different tasks require different skills. If a pool of skills is necessary to a project, then why should one skillset be differentially weighted?
oh good
Or use a voting power to run the business instead of pre-define roles as CEO.
Cheers,
Follow me @Yehey
Flat organizations (google: Holacracy, Flat Organizations) do not have hierarchy and there is no "chain of command".
Hierarchies are problematic. They create stress for those lower down therefore stifling innovation. Perhaps a fluid system of creatives that get equal money but allows them to reward their betters for their output and or reliability. Reward others for their contribution to the whole and to your "wellbeing" - yes crap term. Steemit works like that.
Probably should be based on stock allocation.
Everyone is equal but some are more equal than others.