What will replace the current company-employee model, as we slide into a more fast-and-loose model of work?

I won’t spell out today’s model of work, except to note that the historical social contract — long-term employment, gradual promotion, and a pension after 25 or 30 years — is now a curiosity of the almost forgotten past. Even the watered-down version of that long-ago model of middle-class life is already going away, where we didn’t have aspirations of lifetime employee, but could at least expect our current employer to give us a slight uptick in salary when we joined, and they would still match contributions to a 401(k) and those that met agreed upon goals could expect a bonus in an up year.

But what if the premises of people associating to work together were more egalitarian, and the power imbalance were removed? What if we were owners of our own business? What is management power were distributed, instead of concentrated in an elite? And what if the power to veto was an elected role, and could be overturned by the vox populi?

Not too long ago, I happened on an impressive document: the Constitution for a new business network called Happy Melly, a group focused on a collection of media and education activities related to reconfiguring work around people, instead of people around work. Here’s the Preamble:

0. PREAMBLE

We, the people forming the business network named Happy Melly,

Recognize that traditionally organized businesses consistently fail to improve the lives and happiness of workers and other stakeholders;

Aim to respect the needs of workers and desire to contribute to these by continuously improving organizations, first of all our own Business;

Believe that a business is most effective when it is organized as a network of economically interdependent stakeholders.

We therefore adopt this Constitution as the supreme law of our Business, so as to

• Improve upon our earlier experiences with traditionally organized businesses;
• Lay the foundation for a new generation of businesses in which management is based on the will of all stakeholders;
• Improve the quality of work life of employees, customers, and all other stakeholders; and
• Grow Happy Melly into a Business that is recognized and referred to as an example of a well-managed organization.

Happy Melly’s constitution defines the powers of six sorts of people, as well as acknowledging the role of governments:

1. “Legal entities’  — the nodes in the network, which can be individuals, companies, or any other group of people.
2. Stakeholders — Anyone that is ‘economically directly involved’  in the business of the network, such as customers, employees, suppliers, or business partner, can become a registered stakeholder, if at least one legal entity supports them. Stakeholders have access to financial statements, other performance metrics, and to participate in voting in Huddles, if selected by a Gathering.
3. Gathering — the totality of legal entities, coming together to debate and propose business considerations.
4. Huddle — a small subset of the network — like 3-5 people — designated by the Gathering to consider some question and to make a decision on behalf of the network.
5. The CEO — the leader of the network, elected by a majority of a Gathering and a Huddle. The CEO can return decisions of Huddles and Gathering back for reconsideration (like a veto), except when such decisions are passed unanimously. The CEO can appoint officers — CFO, etc. — to undertake business activities for the network. The CEO does not vote in Gatherings or Huddles.
6. Arbiters — Arbiters resolve conflicts between legal entities or stakeholders, or to deal with rule breaking.  Arbiters are nominated by the CEO, and validated by a Gathering and a Huddle. If there is a conflict between the CEO and legal entities, a temporary arbiter is selected by a Huddle.

This structure feels something like the balance of power across the three branches of the US government, although Huddles aren’t permanent, like Congress is: they are intended to deal with an issue and then dissolve, at least in general, although a Board of Directors — a Huddle created to help the CEO lead the business, and determine the CEO’s compensation — might persist indefinitely. Likewise, Arbiters are just regular members of the network, taking on arbitration between others, not full-time jurists. And, at the core, every member has a vote in Gatherings, except the CEO.

And just like a government, the network’s business operations are supported by taxes: a monthly contribution from each entity, based on an Gathering-approved percentage of gross revenue.

I recently wrote that in a cooperative model of work we each dig our own hole, and own our own shovel.  But it doesn’t necessarily mean we can’t come together and find solidarity. We can construct our own networks, and attain more potential impact, while still remaining a cooperative. We don’t have to agree on everything to agree on core principles, like the Happy Melly folks have done in their Constitution and it’s embedded Bill of Rights.

I will continue searching and researching other network covenants like this one. If you find others, please send me a pointer via @stoweboyd on Twitter.