Smallest common denominator with a big impact

The lowest common denominator of dynamic governanceis people and teams who make decisions together and act independently within the framework of shared values and goals. The classic management tasks are distributed among the team members. Ideally, the teams rotate leadership roles at regular intervals.

The reason why: Organizations choose dynamic governance to better cope with complex situations. People who are committed to dynamic governance want participation and meaning in their work.

🌱 A lot is needed to maintain and ensure that dynamic governance works. Here is the top three:

1. Reliable structures and processes that are understood and supported by everyone
2. Psychological safety, where people feel confident expressing their opinions, learn, and experiment
3. Intellectual humility: the ability to tolerate not knowing, to learn through dialogue, to allow oneself to be corrected, and to understand reality as a construct.

🤝 Once self-organization, always self-organization?

Participants report that the quality of decision-making in teams has improved. Self-organization "pushes" people to take responsibility. They experience that their actions have an effect. This strengthens their sense of self-efficacy. They perceive the organization as more adaptive and courageous.

And: Employees feel more involved and share responsibility. This has an underestimated economic effect: When meaning, influence, and participation are experienced, the likelihood of inner resignation and actual turnover decreases significantly. Less turnover means lower recruitment, lower training costs and less knowledge loss.

⚙️It becomes difficult when:

1. No time and space for experience is given to the learning process of acquiring dynamic governance and self-organization in cercles
2. There is a lack of clarity about what the teams are responsible for, i.e., what they are allowed and expected to decide together (i.e., diffusion of responsibility, no common goal)
3. People have too many roles and these roles are defined to the smallest detail (over-structuring)
4. The wage system is not transparent and the principle of "equal pay for equal work" is not discussed and implemented in the medium term

According to Hans A. Wüthrich's very inspiring lecture, dynamic or shared governance unfolds its power where it isdesired andsupported—not imposed.

Conclusion: Dynamic governance is a case of both. It is a question of attitude – and at the same time a structural frameworkthat supports and promotes this attitude. Without attitude, structure remains empty. Without structure, attitude fizzles out.

What have you learned about the impact and challenges of dynamic governance in your organization? Would you like to learn more about the principles that enable successful participation and dynamic governance? Register for the online impulse workshop on November 17, 2025. I look forward to seeing you there.