Ad hocracy

This is a picture of the coming Ad-hocracy, the fast-moving, information-rich, kinetic organization of the future, filled with transient cells and extremely mobile individuals […]

The temporary system or ad hocracy can only be understood in the context of the preceding remarks on community, if it is to be anything more than a superficial technique for rearranging isolated individuals to perform new kinds of errands for the boss.

In summary, adhocracies are characterized by flexible, adaptive structures in which multidisciplinary teams of professionals are formed around specific problems or objectives. They tend to have constantly changing units (as opposed to the relatively stable functional departments of bureaucracies). New units are formed to deal with new problems or objectives. Old units either are dissolved as problems are solved, or change their makeup as different stages of the project are reached.

Adhocracy means that the different parts of an organization are temporarily assembled to meet the requirements and needs which apply at any particular point in time. […] [Henry] Mintzberg considers that adhocracy is characterized by an organic structure, a low degree of formalization, a high degree of horizontal work specialization based on formal training and specialist competence, a tendency to group specialized personnel in functional units to facilitate administration and personal development ("housekeeping purposes"), while employing them in small, market-based project groups in work organizations. Coordination and management are characterized by decentralized decision making to a relatively high degree, and by mutual adaptation at the project group level, rather than by control from above.

The main advantage of the adhocracy is that it can respond rapidly to change. It promotes creativity by bringing diverse groups of professionals together to work on specific projects. Adhocracies may be permanent structures, such as the lattice type of organizational design used at W.L. Gore & Associates (Rhodes, 1982), or they may be set up on a temporary basis.

Perhaps, [Joel] Garreau implied, the Global Business Network would work like Esther Dyson's Internet and would transform its client organizations into inventive, problem-solving ad-hocracies.

These adhocracies are loose, spontaneously forming, often temporary arrangements that reach across an organization. Adhocracies are less stable than bureaucracies, but they aren't (necessarily) chaotic either, and in fact we're seeing some remarkably intricate, connected work structures emerge. […] Adhocracies ignore the old borders between organizations, between disciplines, between locations, between work and leisure and family.