I can still picture the day I saw this piece hit the business section of the Wall Street Journal — in 1999: A New Model for the Nature of Business: It’s Alive!

And yet we’ve still barely started to embrace what it suggests. Having not looked at the chart in some time, I was even more shocked to recall the “Principle Economic Constraint: Creativity”. In contrast to the ‘old’ focus of capital — is is any wonder Enterprise 2.0 runs headlong against old mindsets looking for things like ROI (a ‘backwards’ thinking mindset) vs. “cost avoidance” or “opportunity potential” (a ‘forward’ thinking mindset)?

I was having a related conversation with colleague Rob Patterson (@robpatrob). It sparked a whole new focus for him on the topic. He immediately penned the first of a great series: How the Natural Organization Works.

But the conversation started with my turning to Rob for a clue about assessing size issues (as in, how does this all scale) using the principles of Fibonacci (we’d had a great conversation about how the patterns can be leveraged, when we were gathered at FASTforward ‘08 — it was clear Rob was the designated expert among us on the topic). I hit a wildcat — the gush was on:

I think that all our HR and org design theory is based on nothing but dogma. As I study natural organization – the military and gaming and VC’s experience with new companies – I see how the Fibonacci sequence plays again and again.

…those whose work I find interesting on this topic … Chris Allen is worth a good look.

We keep coming back to 8 – 34 – 89 – 150 as the key elements

• 8 appears to the the building block – the core unit of intimacy
• 15 seems to be very difficult number…satisfaction dips in groups of 15
• 34, a platoon, is the ideal
• 89 like 15 is an interim number
• 150 is the ideal total human unit – where natural cohesion still applies…over that you need bureaucracy and rules

The Roman Army – where all these numbers were refined by experience over hundreds of year – settled on 8 men in a tent as its core. The Century is 80 men. The Maniple is 150.

The legion had a head office of 7. 6 interns, Tribunes on 6 month rotations and a legate on a 2- 5 year tour.

The management of the legion was embodied in the working leader – the centurion. Centurions were managed on an Empire wide basis and had over 8 ranks themselves. They would be shifted around the empire building experience in many fields and a network of colleagues.

In reality the legate relied on his 2 senior centurions to run the logistics and the military side.

In modern times we have to use too many managers because we pay no attention to the natural organization. A 5,000 person organization would have hundreds in HO. A Centurion is also a different type of manager. He was a leader/manager who had more experience and skills than his men. You still see this in armies with NCO’s who do not sit behind a desk separate from the work, the risk and their men. You still see this in the Fire Brigades. Same with the core numbers in both armies and firebrigades.

Why do these numbers and roles still remain there? Not I think becuase of some learned treatise. But because in war or in a fire, there is no fooling around. These numbers and roles have evolved out of hard experience. They work.

It is also interesting that the 8 man tent where you spent 25 years with the same people, is replicated in the firehall where the teams live with each other. I think this is where the push back really comes about women in the fire service. Intimacy is at the heart of the bond. Love. With women in the group, Pandora’s box is opened.

We separate work from home. In natural organizations, the two are the same. The deeply personal and the mundane such as housekeeping create trust and love that enables people to die for each other if they have to.

Ask why the attachment to the fire service is so great when the money is so poor? I think that we thrive as humans in this more natural tribal organization.

Tribal…Francois (@fgossieaux), I’m sure you’ll want to chime in on that lead-in?