Sociocracy
Sociocracy, also known as dynamic governance, is a system of governance that seeks to create inclusive and effective decision-making processes within organisations. It emphasises equality, transparency, and collective responsibility, aiming to ensure everyone’s voice is heard and considered.
Why did Equal Care choose sociocracy?
When we set up Equal Care, we knew we didn’t want to copy what already existed in the care sector. Too many organisations (even the ones with good intentions) end up creating hierarchies where decisions are made by a small few, often far away from the people most affected by them.
That approach just doesn’t work in social care. It disempowers the people giving and receiving support: the very people who know best what’s needed. So we looked for a different way of organising ourselves. Something that could match our values of equality, transparency, and shared responsibility. That’s what drew us to sociocracy.
It’s a model that values consent over consensus, meaning we can move forward without everyone needing to agree, as long as no one has a strong reason to object. This helps avoid the paralysis that can happen in consensus-based models, while still ensuring everyone’s voice counts.
It also fits how we want to work at Equal Care: distributed power, clarity around roles, and space for learning and improvement. Using sociocracy, we organise our work into Circles, each with its own area of responsibility. Each Circle includes the people doing the work and those affected by it and they make decisions together.
Importantly, our Teams are also Circles and are represented on our platform as such. That’s because we see Teams not just as care arrangements, but as decision-making spaces in their own right. They’re where the most important choices are made about a person's support.
It’s not perfect. No system is. But sociocracy gives us a structure that’s flexible, fair, and aligned with our belief that care works best when when those involved have a real say.
Key Principles of Sociocracy
Decisions are made by consent, meaning that a proposal moves forward unless there are reasoned and paramount objections. This is different from consensus, which requires full agreement from all parties
The organisation is structured into semi-autonomous circles (which could be understood as teams or departments in a traditional business). Each circle has a specific domain and is responsible for its own decisions within that domain.
Circles are connected through a "double-linking process", where two members, typically the leader and a representative, participate in the decision-making of the next higher circle. This ensures the bi-directional flow of information and alignment of goals.
Roles and responsibilities within the organisation are assigned through elections by consent. This process involves nominating individuals, discussing the nominations, and then selecting by consent.
Practices of Sociocracy
Circles meet regularly to discuss their work, make decisions, and review their performance. These meetings are structured to ensure effective and inclusive participation.
Clear definitions of roles and responsibilities within each circle help ensure accountability and clarity in operations.
Continuous feedback is integrated into the decision-making process to allow for adjustments and improvements. This includes regular evaluations of decisions, roles, and processes.
All decisions and policies are documented and made accessible to all organisation members, promoting transparency and shared understanding.
Benefits of Sociocracy
Ensures that all members have a voice in decisions that affect them, leading to more democratic and inclusive governance.
Members are more engaged and motivated when they have a say in how the organization is run and can see the impact of their contributions.
The clear structure and defined roles help streamline operations and make decision-making more efficient.
The feedback loops and regular reviews allow the organisation to adapt quickly to changes and continuously improve its processes.
Challenges and Considerations
Sociocracy makes a lot of sense once you get the hang of it, and many of its ideas feel familiar, especially if you’ve been fortunate enough to work in a team where a collaborative approach is promoted. But putting it into practice across a whole organisation isn’t always easy. From our experience at Equal Care, here are some of the main challenges we’ve come across:
Cultural Shift: For organisations used to top-down decision-making, sociocracy can feel like a big change. It asks people to think differently about power, and that takes time. Shifting to a culture where everyone’s voice matters equally doesn’t happen overnight.
Learning the ropes: To take part in sociocracy with confidence, people need to understand how it works. That means training, practice, and ongoing support. We’ve partnered with Sociocracy for All to help our members build the skills they need, and we continue to learn from what we implement and fine-tune things to fit the way we work.
Time and Commitment: Doing things differently takes time. It can be slower at first - especially when decisions are made through discussion and consent rather than handed down. But over time, that investment pays off in better decisions, stronger teams, and more ownership from everyone involved.
Sociocracy vs. Other Governance Models
From the beginning, Equal Care was set up to work differently from most care organisations. We knew we wanted to avoid traditional hierarchies, but we also needed a model that could guide how we work together, day-to-day.
That’s where sociocracy came in: a system that fits with our values. But to understand why we chose it, it helps to look at some of the other governance models out there:
Traditional Hierarchy: In most care organisations, decisions are made at the top and passed down. A small group of senior managers decides what happens, and those further down the chain carry it out.
In sociocracy, decision-making is shared: the people doing the work, and those affected by the decisions, are the ones making them.
Consensus Decision-Making: Consensus means everyone has to agree before decisions can be made. That can sound ideal, but it can lead to delays, gridlock, or pressure to agree even when there are doubts. Sociocracy works on the basis of consent instead: decisions go ahead unless someone has a reasoned objection. It’s a more flexible, practical way to include everyone’s voice.
Holacracy: Holacracy shares some similarities with sociocracy such as organising work into roles and circles. But its processes are more rigid, and it still tends to follow a formal hierarchy within those roles. We chose sociocracy because it offers structure without losing flexibility. It helps us stay grounded in our purpose: putting power in the hands of the people giving and receiving care.
Conclusion
At Equal Care, we’ve found that sociocracy gives us a structure that works. It’s flexible, practical, and rooted in the belief that everyone should have a voice - especially in a sector as personal and complex as social care.
Sociocracy helps us share responsibility, make better decisions together, and stay focused on what matters. It supports clear roles and smooth day-to-day working, without losing the ability to adapt when things change (which they often do!)
It’s not always perfect, and we’re still learning from our experiences of using it, but sociocracy has helped us stay true to our values: particularly shared power.
Last updated
Was this helpful?