Alex: Hey everyone, welcome to the show! Today we're talking about a book that really challenges how we think about leadership. When you hear the word “power,” what comes to mind? Michelle: Yeah, like a CEO in a corner office making all the calls? Or how about a corporate org chart where info goes one way and, uh, grievances go the other? Alex: Precisely! That’s the old pyramid structure. But according to Matthew Barzun in his book, The Power of Giving Away Power, there's a better way: the “Constellation,” which is a collaborative approach where it's not about top-down control, it's more about shared outcomes. Michelle: So, instead of one big star hogging the spotlight, it's about connecting all the stars. It sounds nice, I'll give you that. But can something that sounds that " out there" actually work in the real world? Alex: Right, that’s exactly what we're digging into! Barzun really challenges old-school leadership thinking by showing us that trust and inclusion drive innovation. Whether he's talking about designing the Great Seal of the U.S. or modern-day examples like Wikipedia, he shows how, by sharing power, you can achieve more together. Michelle: Okay, so on today's show, we're hitting three main ideas: first, why this shift from pyramids to constellations actually matters. Second, how to lead collaboratively in practice – because theories are great but we need to know how can we make it real. Alex: And lastly, how embracing this mindset can create tangible societal change, and also foster personal growth. Whether you're leading a company, a small team, or just your own life, there's something in this for everyone. Michelle: Alright, I'm listening. Let's find out if this constellation idea really holds water.

Alex: Okay, so to start, let's unpack this shift from the Pyramid to the Constellation. It's “really” the core of Barzun's idea, and understanding it helps us see why this shift is important. Michelle: Right. The Pyramid… We all know what that is: layers of authority, top-down decisions. It's pretty much the model we're used to, right? The "normal" way of doing things. Alex: Exactly. But Barzun argues that this "normal" has limitations that we often miss. In Pyramids, decision-making is quite rigid, creativity can be stifled, and the complexity, the myriad challenges of modern complexity overwhelm the leaders. It's, like, trying to navigate a complex maze with only one person holding the entire map, you know? Inefficient and super stressful for that one leader. Michelle: Leading to a system that's too slow to adapt when something unexpected happens, or… when the maze decides to change its layout without telling anyone. So, what's the Constellation offering as an alternative? Alex: The Constellation model flips that completely. Instead of relying on a single person, or one part of the hierarchy, you've got this interconnected network. Everyone brings their own unique perspective. Power isn't just concentrated at the top; it's spread throughout the whole system. Think of, you know, constellations in the night sky: individual stars shining bright on their own, but together they form something much bigger and much more meaningful. Michelle: Alright, I get the metaphor. Visually, at least, it's much less clunky than pyramids. But in practice? Trusting every "star" to do its thing sounds great until one of them burns out, or worse, goes rogue! How does the Constellation stay coherent without someone firmly in control? Alex: That’s a “really” great question. Barzun explains that it comes down to three key principles: trust, interdependence, and inclusivity. Trust isn’t always easy, but it begins with leaders who are willing to let go and empower others, letting go of control. They create environments where people feel ownership and accountability. Michelle: You mean like saying, "I trust you to find your way through the maze, even if it's not the route I would've taken?" Alex: Exactly! It's not about micromanaging. It's about empowering others to take initiative. That's where interdependence comes in. In a Constellation, success doesn’t depend on one leader or strategy. It’s the collective effort of everyone working towards shared goals. And inclusivity makes sure that everyone’s voices are heard and valued, especially those who might be overlooked in a Pyramid system. Michelle: Hmm. Dynamic, for sure, but it also sounds a bit… utopian. So, let's get specific. Can you think of a real-world example where this actually worked? Alex: One of my go-to examples is Wikipedia. It's a master class in Constellation leadership. Traditional encyclopedias, like Britannica, followed the Pyramid model, right? Curated by a central group of experts, slow to adapt, and frankly, not accessible to everyone. I mean due to cost or other issues. Then you had Microsoft’s Encarta, which loosened the hierarchy a bit, but it still relied on a centralized model. Michelle: And Wikipedia just completely disrupted all that. I remember when it started, everyone was skeptical. How can you trust information from random people online? Alex: Exactly! Wikipedia's Constellation model appears chaotic by Pyramid standards, “anyone” can contribute, edit. But that openness leads to faster adaptability, greater diversity, and a level of user engagement that traditional models can’t match. It worked because they trusted people to care about accuracy and accountability. Michelle: And yet, Wikipedia famously uses "semi-protected" pages. So, it's been proven necessary to, like, lock down edits from bad actors. Does this support or contradict the Constellation idea? Alex: It actually supports it! Barzun isn't saying Constellations are perfect, just more adaptive. Wikipedia uses those protections specifically because it trusts its community to identify the flaws and fix them together. That’s the beauty of operating like a network; the whole system learns and evolves. Michelle: Okay, I'll admit, the Wikipedia example is compelling. But does it only work in abstract spaces like information-sharing? What about action-driven situations, like political campaigns, for example? Alex: Funny you should ask! That leads us to another iconic example: Barack Obama’s grassroots campaign. His team didn’t operate like most traditional political organizations, which tend to be organized like Pyramids. Instead, they embraced the “Snowflake Model,” which is the campaign's version of a Constellation. Michelle: I've heard of this. Volunteers weren't just handed scripts and clipboards. They were their own micro-networks, running mini-campaigns inside the bigger one. Alex: Exactly! Traditional campaigns often treat volunteers like cogs, just carrying out orders from headquarters. Obama's team flipped that approach. They shared voter data, provided support tools directly to volunteers, essentially saying, "We trust you to own this." The result? Remarkable engagement. Volunteers not only showed up, but they recruited others, creating a network effect that strengthened everything. Michelle: I’m guessing there was a lot of concern about sharing that much information. Alex: Absolutely. Critics feared it would be chaos. But instead, accountability actually increased. Volunteers felt valued, which energized the entire system. And that's the power of trust and inclusivity, it connects individual contributions into something larger than the sum of its parts. Michelle: Fair enough. But giving away that much power must require a serious mindset shift for leaders. How do you actually transition from a Pyramid to a Constellation without, you know, losing your footing along the way?

Alex: So, the million-dollar question, right? How do leaders “actually” put this Constellation mindset into practice without everything just falling apart? Barzun lays out some key strategies, and I think breaking down silos is a good place to start, because that's where a lot of organizations get tripped up right away. Michelle: Silos... ugh. Those invisible walls between teams—they turn collaboration into some kind of extreme sport. You know, like everyone's on the same team in theory, but they've all got their own completely separate rule books. Alex: Yes! Silos kill communication, and they completely shut down creativity because everyone gets super narrow in their focus. So, to break them down, leaders really need to push shared goals – goals that everyone can get behind. The kind of things that make people feel like they're contributing to something bigger than their own department, you know? Michelle: Okay, shared goals, I get it. But what happens when individual teams are still incentivized to compete with each other? How do you stop them from just prioritizing their own little kingdoms over the greater good? Alex: That's where leaders have to step up – not to order people around, but to really bring everyone together. Let’s think about Microsoft Encarta for a second. When they launched it, they totally ditched the old Britannica model, all those isolated experts working separately. Encarta brought in multimedia and made it interactive. That adaptability came from putting the tech people and content creators in the same room with a shared vision. Michelle: Right, but even Encarta had its limitations. It was dynamic “for its time”, but it wasn’t decentralized. Then along came Wikipedia and blew the silos to smithereens. They handed the entire thing over to a global community. Complete strangers could edit, add content, connecting across languages, disciplines, time zones and whatever. If Encarta cracked the door open, Wikipedia kicked it off its hinges. Alex: And that’s when trust really comes into play. Wikipedia handed over power to the community, giving “anyone” the ability to contribute, really without any barriers. Obviously, there were challenges, but by trusting its users and encouraging collaboration, Wikipedia became this incredible example of decentralization at scale. Michelle: I get why silos are the enemy of the Constellation model, but trust on that level feels kind of scary. So, how do leaders really empower individuals without losing control and creating total chaos? Alex: Perfect segue! Empowering individuals is so key here, and it's not just about delegating tasks – it's about giving people real ownership. Barzun talks about Dee Hock, the founder of Visa, who really nailed this. Hock completely reimagined what financial systems could look like, turning away from that traditional top-down control. Michelle: Ah, yes! The guy who turned Visa from another credit card into a global juggernaut. Didn’t he get rid of traditional ownership structures, so power wasn't just hoarded at the top but was distributed pretty equally among the banks involved? Alex: Exactly. Hock basically dismantled the typical chain of command and said, “Every bank, big or small, gets one vote.” Super unconventional. But in doing so, he built a system where banks both competed and collaborated. Everyone had skin in the game and felt empowered, and that built trust and accountability across the board. Michelle: And that decision to trust even the smallest players – without assuming they’d just get steamrolled by the big guys! – is what allowed Visa to become what it is today. Pretty audacious. Alex: It was audacious, but it worked precisely because Hock set clear boundaries that allowed autonomy within a shared framework. It's about changing how you lead, not ditching leadership altogether, so that people feel empowered to innovate while still working towards the same overarching mission. That kind of decentralized ownership creates resilience and flexibility – two things traditional hierarchies often lack. Michelle: OK, I can see how empowerment works when you’ve got a well-designed system. But if this Constellation approach relies so heavily on trust, what happens when that trust is missing? You mentioned inclusivity earlier. Is that where it comes in? Alex: Exactly. Inclusivity is really the glue that holds the Constellation mindset together. Leaders need to make sure that everyone, no matter their role, is invited to participate. Think about Obama’s grassroots campaign and how they used the Snowflake Model. Instead of a traditional political hierarchy, Obama's team empowered local organizers to lead within a national strategy. Michelle: And it wasn't just small, feel-good efforts. They actually gave them real tools and resources. I remember the voter data they shared with volunteers. That's gold for any campaign, and they didn't hoard it at headquarters like it was some huge secret. That was a serious trust move. Alex: Totally! They trusted those volunteers to use the data responsibly and to act in the best interests of the network. And that unleashed a wave of creativity, with people bringing their own strengths and strategies. It wasn't just about following orders – it was about taking ownership and bringing others in through community outreach, social media, all sorts of things. Michelle: Okay, I’ll admit it – trust, empowerment, and inclusivity, all tied together with shared goals... it sounds like it could actually work, “if” it's implemented intentionally. But here's what I still don’t get: at what point does all this decentralization get so wild that the whole structure comes crashing down? Alex: That’s a fair point. But Barzun emphasizes that Constellations aren't supposed to be chaotic free-for-alls. Even in these decentralized systems, there’s still a strong framework guiding behavior – a framework built on a shared purpose and everyone’s interdependence. So, you're not losing structure; you're redesigning it to be more fluid and collaborative. Michelle: So, it’s really about finding that sweet spot – giving up just enough control to encourage creativity while having boundaries to keep things focused. Alright, I buy it. What's next?

Alex: So, with all these practical ideas we’ve been discussing, let's zoom out a bit. What does this leadership model really mean for society as a whole, and for our own personal journeys? The Constellation model offers a fundamentally new way of looking at the world, not just for those in leadership positions, but for anyone trying to navigate the complexities of modern life. It’s about moving away from that “us versus them” mentality and embracing collaboration and our shared humanity. Michelle: Okay, so we’re going beyond the usual leadership topics—boardrooms, political campaigns—and delving into social dynamics and even individual self-improvement. Where do we even begin with such a broad scope? Alex: I think a great place to start is vulnerability, which Barzun actually identifies as a key element of this Constellation mindset. A lot of people see vulnerability as a weakness, but it’s actually a deliberate act of trust, an opportunity to connect and build collective strength. Think about Obama's eulogy for Reverend Clementa Pinckney after the Charleston church shooting, for example. Michelle: Ah, yes, the one where he sang "Amazing Grace." That moment still gives me chills. But what does it “really” tell us about leadership? Alex: It's a powerful example of how vulnerability can foster unity. It wasn't a planned moment, right? It was spontaneous. But when Obama started singing, it was like he was giving everyone permission to grieve, to find hope, and to feel connected. That vulnerability wasn't just a personal expression; it was an invitation for others to share in that moment. Michelle: I see how that could humanize a leader, but wasn't it also a huge risk? Taking such a personal, unscripted approach at such a sensitive event—it could easily have backfired. Alex: Absolutely, it was a risk, but that’s precisely the point. Vulnerability requires courage, and when leaders show that side of themselves, they signal that they're not all-powerful or all-knowing. They're human. And that creates space for others to bring their authentic selves to the table. It becomes empowering and inclusive. In that moment, Obama wasn't just a president; he was part of a grieving community. Michelle: So, vulnerability isn't just about showing emotions; it’s about building connections and trust. But can you really be that open in every situation? What if people take advantage of it? Alex: That’s a fair question. Vulnerability isn’t about being reckless; it’s about being intentionally transparent. Barzun’s point is that when vulnerability is paired with trust and inclusivity, it can transform relationships and build resilience, especially during crises. Michelle: Alright, vulnerability helps unify people in difficult times. Let’s move on to inclusivity. It’s such a buzzword these days. What does the Constellation model actually bring to the table? Alex: Inclusivity, in this model, goes beyond just having diverse representation. It's about creating an environment where everyone has a voice and can actually influence the outcome. Barzun uses the example of younger generations and their views on diversity to illustrate this. Michelle: You're talking about how younger people are struggling with this tension between “fitting in” and “standing out,” right? They want to celebrate their individuality, but they also crave a sense of belonging. Alex: Exactly. And the Constellation model offers a valuable insight here: we don't have to choose between the two. Inclusivity means finding strength in our differences. Barzun emphasizes unity through shared purpose instead of forcing conformity. Michelle: So, it's less of a “melting pot” and more of a constellation. Each unique contribution enhances the whole. Alex: Precisely! This principle can address so many societal issues, from polarization to apathy. Think about Obama's grassroots campaign; volunteers weren't just used as tools. They were empowered as individuals whose backgrounds, ideas, and skills were essential to the campaign’s success. It wasn’t a rigid hierarchy; it was a vibrant, inclusive network, and that's why it worked. Michelle: Okay, but let’s not get too idealistic. Inclusivity sounds great, but doesn't it create conflict in practice? How do you balance so many different opinions without descending into chaos? Alex: That's where clarity of purpose comes in. Barzun argues that inclusivity thrives when there's a strong, shared mission. Think of a graduation ceremony: we celebrate individual achievements, but what we're really honoring is the collective journey – the families, teachers, and friends who made it possible. Michelle: Interesting analogy. So, instead of seeing success as an individual climb to the top, the Constellation model frames it as something rooted in collaboration and shared effort. Graduation as a metaphor for inclusivity—I see the connection. But still, it seems easier to talk about than to actually do. Alex: That’s why deliberate leadership is so important. Leaders need to go beyond just tolerating diversity and create spaces where collaboration can flourish. Inclusivity isn’t just morally right; it drives innovation and problem-solving by bringing a wider range of perspectives to the table. Michelle: Alright, I’ll concede that inclusivity can spark creativity. But what about shared experiences? You mentioned earlier that Barzun sees them as crucial for both personal and societal growth. Alex: Shared experiences are the glue that holds this model together. They remind us that our individual journeys are interconnected. Think about Obama singing "Amazing Grace"—it had a ripple effect and created a shared moment of profound connection. Michelle: So, even in a deeply divided society, shared experiences can bridge the gaps, at least temporarily. But how do you scale that up? How do we create more opportunities for collective moments in a world that values individual achievement above all else? Alex: By changing the narrative. Instead of glorifying competition, we need to build a culture that values collaboration. As Barzun suggests, we need to redefine success as a collective act of growth and contribution, not just individual achievement. Michelle: Which brings us back to the Constellation model - leaders stepping down from their pedestals and weaving themselves into the network. It’s a big shift in perspective, but the more I hear these examples, the more optimistic I become about its potential. Alex: And that’s the beauty of it. It shows us that we don’t have to be lone heroes. We can move forward together, stronger, more interconnected, and ready to tackle challenges as a collective.

Alex: Okay, Michelle, so we've really gone deep today, right? We've taken apart the old Pyramid model and really embraced this idea of a Constellation mindset. Barzun's main point is pretty straightforward: when leaders actually trust, empower, and include the people around them, they can unlock the potential of the entire system. It means shifting away from just telling people what to do, and more towards working together, to build networks that are resilient, adaptable, and creative. Michelle: Exactly, Alex, and it's not as simple as just getting rid of hierarchies altogether, it's about thinking about leadership in a completely different way. One that values working together, over just being in control. Whether it's something like Wikipedia, which changed how we work together, or Visa, that proved decentralization can actually work on a large scale, or even Obama's campaign mobilizing grassroots networks, it shows that shared power actually helps things grow. Alex: Absolutely, and it's not just for huge organizations, the Constellation model can also teach us some important lessons about society and how we grow as people. Showing vulnerability builds trust, being inclusive sparks creativity, and having a shared purpose helps us work together to overcome challenges. Michelle: So, for anyone listening, the key takeaway is to start small. Think about your team, your community, or even your personal relationships. Where can you let go a little bit? Not as if you're losing something, but instead, view it as an investment in trust and collaboration. It's not about perfection, it's more about creating connection. Alex: Right, because as Barzun reminds us, leadership isn't something you do alone, it's about the strength we find in being human together. So, let's go out there and start weaving those constellations. Michelle: Okay, that's definitely something worth thinking about.