Organizational Structure And Operating Protocols: Fill & Download for Free

One thing that is notable about Jeff Bezos compared to other tech company founders is that he comes from a Wall Street background. He had his start at Bankers Trust before working at DE Shaw.This difference is fairly notable when you look at how Amazon operates compared to other companies in Silicon Valley. Amazon is much less about breaking and disrupting markets but more about optimizing business processes. Coming from a corporate background where companies relied on structure and organization, Amazon is more of a GE than a Google or an Apple.Which makes Bezos distinct from his peers. Startups CEOs are generally renown for their brilliance and creativity. Bezos is certainly a brilliant and very creative guy but his true contribution to Amazon is ensuring that they have strong business practices and an efficient organizational structure.There is the famous "Google Platform's Rant" that has been the subject of several business case studies and highlights how Bezos thinks. [1] In the letter, Steve Yegge writes about how Google does everything better than Amazon EXCEPT for platform development. Bezos in his authoritarian fashion decrees:1) All teams will henceforth expose their data and functionality through service interfaces.2) Teams must communicate with each other through these interfaces.3) There will be no other form of interprocess communication allowed: no direct linking, no direct reads of another team's data store, no shared-memory model, no back-doors whatsoever. The only communication allowed is via service interface calls over the network.4) It doesn't matter what technology they use. HTTP, Corba, Pubsub, custom protocols -- doesn't matter. Bezos doesn't care.5) All service interfaces, without exception, must be designed from the ground up to be externalizable. That is to say, the team must plan and design to be able to expose the interface to developers in the outside world. No exceptions.6) Anyone who doesn't do this will be fired.In a single email, Bezos changes all of Amazon from a global marketplace company into a platform company. Bezos, a man who worked for the large financial institutions, understands better than most tech founders is that for a giant to dominate, their weapons must scale. Every thing was going to be build as a service oriented architecture regardless of application. Every thing had the potential to become an API and to become a platform instantaneously. Amazon platforms like AWS and the Kindle Fire spun out of these type of business processes. Where did this attitude come from? It came from the way how data was originally being handled in banks.Bezos is different from the other CEOs in that he isn't cut from the same cloth. He is as conventional and old fashioned as all of the companies the tech companies want to disrupt. But since no one else is conventional, that makes him unique.Footnotes[1] Stevey's Google Platforms Rant I was at Amazon for about six and a half years,…

If we are to strictly follow bitcoin’s first principles of decentralization, then very little to no money should be made by the centers.Bitcoin, the system, is itself the quintessential decentralized and autonomous ecosystem today. And its center is poor, because it is non-existent as an entity. All of the revenues/profits are being made at the edges of the bitcoin network.So, if we are to mirror bitcoin, we need to stay true to its decentralized characteristics and properties; not just as a matter of principle, but as a matter of operational integrity.As it evolves, decentralization is not something that is categorically there or not there. It’s not a black or white situation yet. There are different flavors, shades and degrees of decentralization. It is becoming something we aim for and reach over time, not overnight. I’ve already described the “ideal” framework for distributed autonomous organizations, and it’s not that easy getting there.The nature of centersIt used to be that nothing happened without central authorities, or central powers, or central regulations, or central approvals. With decentralization, it’s the opposite. Everything happens at the edges, and at the nodes near the peripheries of the overall network.With decentralization, you don’t install a center first. You install a platform that enables the network to flourish where the “center” of attention (used figuratively) and activity are the nodes and the peripheral users.We should not bastardize or compromise on the decentralization concept by picking and choosing which of its characteristics we want to adopt and which ones we reject.The vision brought by bitcoin includes:Speed of money/transactions transfersNo intermediaries between transactionsFlat organizational structuresTrust inside the networkResiliency of the network against attacks or censorship, with no central point of failureDecisions and changes based on reasonable consensus processesFluidity from peer to peerAnd “peer to peer” means “peer to peer”, ie without anyone in the middle to buffer, delay, or try to simulate P2P.What will bitcoin enable us to do?Compare bitcoin to the Internet, in terms what we are being empowered with. Arguably, it was the ability for anyone to become a publisher of content. Whether you are sharing a photo, a comment or a blog post, you are publishing something and expressing yourself freely on the Internet.What is that equivalent (big) thing that bitcoin will allow us to do really well? Is it to be our own bank? Is it to run legal contracts between each other without third party clearinghouses? Is it to earn value and cryptocurrency on our own, as a new type of work?For decentralization to take full effect, we would need to see:Decentralized content distribution and exchange networks (maybe for digital goods initially), without central authorities that tax it or control it.Decentralized transportation services, based on peer to peer services, without companies like Uber taking excessive fees at the center.Decentralized storage, where we earn money by sharing unused capacities, without companies like Dropbox in the middle.Decentralized computing, without companies like Amazon Web Services serving it.Decentralized banking, where we control our money ourselves and wrap rules around how we spend it, without central banks.Decentralized gambling where trust is baked in, and without a house that’s not always so trusted.Decentralized exchanges for trading financial instruments or products, without central exchanges.Decentralized titles transfers or real estate transactions without central authorities that control the issuance of deeds.Decentralized public registries for documents such as marriages, without going through government registrars.[For more blockchain-based decentralized applications, I suggest checking the book Blockchain: Blueprint for a New Economy, and here’s my review on it.]It’s not easy being decentralizedApple’s iTunes is the typical centralized marketplace. If it were decentralized, first of all, Apple wouldn’t take a 30% cut on revenues. Second, whatever value is derived from app sales or via other monetization would be spread across users who use or promote an app by sharing their own stats for example, and Apple wouldn’t deserve that 30%.Of course, this is a hypothetical scenario, that is barely half-baked; but the nugget behind it is that the value is at the edges of the network, not at its center. Nothing happens without users that add value, so why not re-circulate a (large) part of that value back into the network to make it stronger?It’s not easy to become decentralized. But it’s easier if it’s in your genesis, or if you are influenced to believe that way, or when you start a new organization from the ground-up as a decentralized network, platform, service, currency, or marketplace.The challenge becomes: where is the monetization behind decentralized models? Often, a decentralized construct is based on two foundational components: a protocol and a marketplace.The (technical) protocol is like the operating system, and monetization is hard there, but the marketplace is where the network lives, and you need to search for innovative monetization models inside the marketplace, especially with user features and services that overlay themselves on that network.And we must also ask for whom is the value transferred – the instigators or the participants? It’s very possible that value starts with the users who are the key actors in the decentralization organism. If the users benefit personally, then the network benefits collectively, and that spills over to whoever started the network.The concept of “central operations” is shattered, because maybe it shouldn’t exist. The underlying protocol enables decentralized operations, and that is where the activity and value should reside.My conclusion is that we are still learning and experimenting with business, revenue and value appreciation models behind decentralized networks, markets and organizations. One thing is for sure: the centers and operators should make less, and the collective of users/stakeholders/participants will make more.People do not know that there are so many platforms like cryptomax(www.cryptomax.tech)where investment of cryptocurrency can be grown.This platform has made the investment of crypto gone far by doubling invested coin after 7 days.I have been on this platform for the past few months and it has been helping.

Too much procedure and protocols can usually impede effective performance, hampers employees’ creative thinking. Innovative companies usually make sure that their structures and operational processes as simple as possible. This allows an effective flow of information which is essential for innovation. So, a simple flat structure seems to be way effective for innovation.