This brings us to a central truth about organizations: they are inherently messy. There are no panaceas, no structures that solve all problems. Any attempts to completely eliminate the mess are doomed to failure. Yes, there are costly inefficiencies in decentralization, but the fire of personal ownership—of being our own little business—elevates human motivation and stimulates innovation in powerful, albeit somewhat chaotic, ways.

Bureaucratic organizations are inertial, incremental, and dispiriting. In a bureaucracy, the power to initiate change is vested in a few senior leaders. When those at the top fall prey to denial, arrogance, and nostalgia, as they often do, the organization falters. That’s why deep change in a bureaucracy is usually belated and convulsive. Bureaucracies are also innovation-phobic. They are congenitally risk averse, and offer few incentives to those inclined to challenge the status quo. In a bureaucracy, being a maverick is a high-risk occupation. Worst of all, bureaucracies are soul crushing. Deprived of any real influence, employees disconnect emotionally from work. Initiative, creativity, and daring—requisites for success in the creative economy—often get left at home.

Though expensive and usually belated, reorganizations are widely regarded as the only way to realign an organization with its environment. As a report by the Boston Consulting Group put it, “Rapid change requires companies to reorganize faster than ever before.” Good luck with that!

What’s needed are radically new organizational models that downplay formal structure. In a world of relentless change, trade-offs need to be made as close to the front lines as possible. Boundaries must be malleable. Resources, rather than being hoarded, must flow unhindered toward promising opportunities. Interunit coordination must be the product of nimble, self-organizing communities and market-like transactions rather than blanket policies or cumbersome councils. In short, we need organizations that, like the biosphere, the internet, or a vibrant city, are more emergent than engineered.

So, let’s face facts.

BUREAUCRACY IS FAMILIAR. You won’t have the courage to take on bureaucracy unless you believe there are alternatives. We must search out organizations that have successfully defied management orthodoxy.

BUREAUCRACY IS COMPLEX AND SYSTEMIC. Fragmented, half-hearted attempts won’t cut it. We need to replace the entire edifice of bureaucracy—one stone at a time.

BUREAUCRACY IS WELL DEFENDED. There will be resistance, so management rebels need to join forces. You have to build a grassroots movement that can overwhelm or route around the defenders of the status quo.

BUREAUCRACY SERVES A PURPOSE, HOWEVER POORLY. The goal is to carefully dismantle bureaucracy, not simply blow it up. You need a change strategy that is both audacious and prudent.

BUREAUCRACY IS SELF-REPLICATING. There will be no easy victories. Bureaucrats will fight back. To persevere, you’ll need a sense of purpose that’s as unshakable as the path is arduous.

Before moving on, let’s recap:

• Bureaucracies are replication machines. They’re designed for exploit, not explore.

• Bureaucracies tend to be monocultures. They’re run by individuals temperamentally inclined to favor the status quo.

• Bureaucratic information systems fail to capture the hidden costs of one-sided trade-offs. As a result, many decisions are underinformed and, therefore, suboptimal.

• Bureaucracies tend to enforce uniform trade-offs across the entire organization. Though unsophisticated, this preserves the center’s power and sense of order.

• The bureaucratic aversion to ambiguity leads to either/or thinking. Rather than maintaining a creative tension, organizations tend to whipsaw between counterposed priorities.