The Third Place: Council Democracy at the Workspace (Pt. II of III)

Not everything in the State of Total Mobilization can be planned ahead in advance and in meticulous detail befitting of conventional economic planning methods. Sometimes, it is necessary for certain Enterprises to be able to perform its Legal Duties with as many Legal Rights as it is be deemed necessary to “play everything by ear.” There may even be cases where information, in spite of the latest information-gathering technologies, is either incomplete, inaccurate, or missing. And there are circumstances where another approach to Mission-Type Economic Planning (MTEP) may be required and relying on Codetermination will prove insufficient.

When Codetermination cannot be used to implement Council Democracy in the workspace, Worker’s Self-Management is capable of providing an alternative method for economic organizations. At its most fundamental level, Worker’s Self-Management entails giving greater autonomy and freedom of action to the rank-and-file members of an Enterprise. It involves mastery of the innere Führung (inner Leadership) inherent in the same Auftragstaktik (Mission-Type Tactics) methodology that makes MTEP feasible. In Auftragstaktik as well as in MTEP, following the Explicit and Implicit Intents of an Enterprise’s Direct Orders, what is to be expected of the Enterprise to perform its economic activities, is decisive. The Direct Orders may not necessarily be coming from the Economic Planners, the State Commissars, or the Central Planners themselves. It often comes from the expectations of what any given Profession and Enterprise, and what is required of them in order to fulfill their Legal Duties.

If an Enterprise is having organizational and leadership issues in its ability to create Arbeit and Geld, the first course of action is to never immediately jump to entertaining notions of “Nationalization” or “Privatization.” Neither is going to resolve those issues if the people causing them are still going to be running the affected Enterprise. At some point, somebody else has to step forward, take the initiative, and lead the others.

Back in the previous Entry, Codetermination had the Economic Planner, the Administrator, the Delegate, and the Personnel. A State Commissariat’s Superintendent or their subordinate State Commissar will also be present in the event of a Transvaluation of All Arbeit. However, in Worker’s Self-Management, the roles of the Administrator and the Delegate will be merged. A single “Delegative Administrator” can be expected to oversee the affairs of an economic organization that may be a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE), a National-Socialized Enterprise (NSE), or a Public-Owned Enterprises (POEs). State-Administrated Enterprises (SAEs) are too large and Public-Directed Enterprises (PDEs) are too small to make Worker’s Self-Management to be considered practical. Given the characteristics of the Delegative Administrator, an Indirect Delegation will be employed wherein the Delegative Administrators report to their affiliated Guild. The political-economic governance of an Enterprise operating on Worker’s Self-Management is beholden to an “Inspector” from the State Commissariat, who in turn reports to one of the Chambers of their central or regional government’s council.

The Delegative Administrator, in exchange for letting an Inspector carry out what they could have been doing under Codetermination, will have more opportunities to flex their skills at conducting Auftragstaktik. Auftragstaktik demands the fostering of mutual trust and leadership training for the rank-and-file members of the Enterprise. Everyone is expected to be on the workspace and working together as part of an organized effort. Whoever is chosen to become the Delegative Administrator will not be sitting and negotiating with the boardroom members upstairs. Instead, they will be there on the workspace assuming full Command Responsibility over what happens to the Enterprise as it engages in greater risk-taking. Any Direct Orders from the Economic Planner may be disobeyed so long as the Explicit and Implicit Intents of the Economic Planner have been upheld.        

What can be expected from the Direct Orders? A better question, from the standpoint of Production for Dasein, should be: ‘What is the purpose of the Enterprise’s existence?’ Is the Enterprise creating Equipmentalities, finished goods and services, digital software and products, or something else? Whatever the case may be, the goal of each rank-and-file member remains the same pursuit of the ‘greatest Quality of Arbeit for the least Quality of Geld’. In essence, the Economic Planner is counting on the Delegative Administrator to ensure that everybody below is doing what is of expected them to run the Enterprise. Since there is nobody between the Economic Planner and the Delegative Administrator, everybody else downstairs is expected to demonstrate leadership and teamwork. That is the Legal Duty that comes with the Legal Right of being granted greater autonomy in the workspace.  

Some Implicit Intents are to be expected for the rank-and-file members when making key decisions on their own initiative. If the Enterprise needs to figure out what it has to do next, do not expect to be dictated by the Delegative Administrator on what to do. If the Enterprise is unsure as to how much, do not expect the Economic Planner to dictate how much. And if the Enterprise happens to find itself without any Direct Orders, do not let the Inspector catch the Enterprise growing complacent and leaderless. Anyone who fails to comprehend these Implicit Intents with regard to MTEP will be relieved of their command (that is, they will be let go from the Enterprise).

The Economic Planner must know when to intervene in the affairs of an Enterprise using Worker’s Self-Management. If all personnel are doing what is expected of their Professions, and there no complaints or issues at the moment, it is unnecessary to intervene. If something seems unclear or if somebody is not sure on what needs to be done, do not hesitate to let them ask questions and expect answers in return. And if somebody has an objection to what is being done, listen to them and take their concerns into consideration.

Conversely, the Delegative Administrator must also realize where to direct and manage their subordinates. When somebody needs help, do not hesitate to assist them with their tasks. Have others pitch in if they are already on top of their own assignments. If the subordinates have to express something of importance or concern to the Enterprise, listen to them and do not be afraid to provide new Intents beyond those provided by the Economic Planner.

Should there be instances where a Transvaluation of All Arbeit is needed, the Economic Planner must play the devil’s advocate to the saint’s advocate of the Delegative Administrator. The Inspector of the Enterprise will be the one to make the final decision on whether a Transvaluation of All Arbeit should be done or not. Assuming the Transvaluation of All Arbeit has been accepted by the Inspector, the rules of the Probation Period as they were established in the preceding Entry remain the same.         

But suppose for a moment that the Enterprise fails to bear the burden of Command Responsibility of conducting Worker’s Self-Management. If the Inspector is convinced that the Enterprise is poorly led and organized, then they reserve the Legal Duty of ensuring that Enterprise comes under new leadership from somebody else who is more qualified than the incumbent Delegative Administrator. In the absence of any suitable Delegative Administrator, the Inspector of the Enterprise will be presented with two options on what to do next:

  • The Inspector may submit a “Letter of Complaint” to their State Commissariat, where a formal request will be sent out to the Tournament that the affected Enterprise has new some open positions. If another Enterprise accepts the request, regardless of how it implements Council Democracy, somebody will be chosen as its preferred candidate. Candidates are to be chosen according to the qualifications and the ongoing demands of the affected Enterprise. The ones who are performing poorly will either be reprimanded, demoted to a lower Social Rank, or relieved of their Profession in the case of more serious offenses.    
  • Alternatively, the Inspector could submit a “Letter of Reorganization” to their State Commissariat, citing repeated offenses from the Enterprise’s personnel and continued failure to demonstrate any discernible signs of improvement or competence. In that case, the Delegative Administrator will be replaced by somebody from another Enterprise within the same Industry and the affected Enterprise will see its leadership positions be changed. The older ones will be replaced by new ones, preferably from more competent Enterprises.

For Enterprises implementing Council Democracy as Worker’s Self-Management, the Letter of Reorganization will allow the Inspector to change the Enterprise’s organizational structure. State-Owned Enterprises will be reconfigured for Codetermination; Public-Owned Enterprises will be reconfigured for Joint-Ownership. For National-Socialized Enterprises, given the fact that this economic organization straddles the distinction between state ownership and social ownership, it is up to the State Commissariat on whether an NSE should have Codetermination or Joint-Ownership. In the event of the latter, the next Entry will cover the specifications of Joint-Ownership and how it operates within the broader framework of MTEP and the Tournament.  



Categories: Third Place

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: