Holacracy Governance Meeting Template

The Holacracy governance meeting is where a circle evolves itself. It is the only place roles, accountabilities, domains, and policies are formally created, changed, or removed. The engine that makes this safe is integrative decision-making, a process designed to let any single person move a proposal forward unless there is a real, surfaced objection.

When to use it

Run governance on a regular cadence, often monthly, and call an extra session when structural tension builds up. Use it whenever the friction is about how the circle is organized: an unclear accountability, a role doing too much, a missing role, or a policy that needs to constrain how work happens. Operational blockers belong in the tactical meeting instead.

Who attends

All members filling roles in the circle attend, usually four to twelve people. A facilitator runs integrative decision-making strictly by the process, and a secretary records the adopted governance into the circle record. The facilitator protects the steps; their job is process integrity, not the outcome.

How to run it

After the check-in round and quick administrative concerns, the circle builds an agenda of tensions without debate. Then each item runs through the integrative decision-making cycle one at a time. The proposer presents a proposal to resolve their tension. Clarifying questions surface understanding, not opinions. A reaction round lets each person respond in turn, after which the proposer may amend and clarify. Then the objection round tests whether the proposal would cause harm or move the circle backward; only valid objections stop it. Surfaced objections are integrated into an amended proposal that resolves the original tension without creating new harm. A closing round ends the meeting. The format feels rigid at first, and that rigidity is what keeps power with the process rather than the loudest voice.

Facilitator tips

• Keep clarifying questions and reactions strictly separate; do not let one bleed into the other.
• Test each objection against the validity criteria rather than accepting it as a preference.
• Anchor every proposal in a real tension the proposer is experiencing.
• Protect the round structure so quieter voices get equal airtime.

Common mistakes

• Slipping into open debate instead of the structured rounds.
• Treating personal preferences as objections, which stalls good proposals.
• Designing perfect governance up front rather than evolving it tension by tension.
• Using governance to solve operational work that belongs in tactical.

Ready to evolve your roles cleanly? Run it in OrgTP and keep your circle structure, accountabilities, and policies in one living record.