Organizational Management Where Systems, Not People, Take Responsibility
As the Chair of PyCon JP 2025, I would like to share our approach to organizational management where “systems take responsibility, not people.” This represents a fundamental shift from traditional management styles that place heavy burdens on individuals to a structure where collective decision-making and systematic processes bear the responsibility.
PyCon JP 2025 will be held at Hiroshima International Conference Center from September 26-28, 2025. The final day is a development sprint.
Introduction
In PyCon JP 2025’s organizational management, we aim to create an organization where “systems take responsibility, not people.” This means distributing responsibility across the entire organization through transparent and fair processes with sufficient review time, rather than concentrating responsibility on individuals, to make better decisions.
In traditional organizational management, there are often situations where “someone must make a decision,” placing heavy responsibility on individuals. Particularly under time constraints, it is sometimes considered virtuous for leaders or responsible parties to “steel themselves” and make personal decisions. However, we take a different approach.
To achieve this “responsibility distribution through systems,” we have built various mechanisms.
Take Time for Review When Making Irreversible Decisions
The most important thing is to take sufficient time and opportunities for review when making irreversible decisions. For decisions that are difficult to change once made, such as venue selection, event dates, and fundamental policies, we adjust schedules to secure review time and opportunities rather than having someone make personal decisions due to time constraints.
This is not just idealism. In practice, we sometimes feel pressure when important decisions are looming, thinking “we must decide now.” However, it is precisely in such situations that we need to pause and think. Do we really need to decide right now, or can we adjust the schedule to create review time?
In many cases, even in situations that seem to require “urgent decisions,” there is actually room for adjustment of several days to weeks. By using that time to hear more people’s opinions and examine from various angles, we can make decisions without regret.
Even when there are time constraints, rather than shortening the review process, we review the entire schedule. We secure necessary review time by adjusting priorities of other tasks or changing announcement timing to external parties. This is not “postponing decisions” but “ensuring appropriate processes.”
“Everyone Reviews Together” Where All Can Contribute
In our organization, we value opportunities for all organizing members to contribute, including not only those who speak up actively but also those who think carefully. The most important opportunity is free and constructive participation in “reviewing together.”
People with cautious personalities sometimes feel that “their opinions have no value.” However, in reality, the perspective of cautious people is a valuable opportunity to discover risks and improvement points that are often overlooked. In the review process, “opposing opinions” and “concerns” are also welcome. They are not obstacles that delay decisions but important elements for producing better results.
In review sessions, all participants can express opinions on equal footing regardless of experience or position. A new member’s naive question may sometimes highlight important issues that veterans had overlooked.
This review culture creates a shared understanding that the final decision is “the result of everyone’s consideration.” Instead of individuals bearing the heavy responsibility of “I decided this,” the entire organization can accept it as “the path we chose.”
Layered Responsibility Structure
In our organization, we distribute responsibility through a clear layered structure. The General Incorporated Association PyCon JP Association appoints the Chair and creates large-scale mechanisms including codes of conduct and privacy policies. Within that scope, the Chair determines year-specific policies, gathers people, and builds concrete mechanisms. Each team and individual makes daily judgments in their respective specialized areas.
The important point in this structure is that higher levels “support” rather than “manage” lower levels. The Association creates an environment where the Chair can work comfortably, and the Chair creates conditions where team members can demonstrate their capabilities. In organizing member training, we have established a system that requires compliance with codes of conduct and understanding of privacy policies.
Systematizing Decision Processes
We classify decisions into two types. Irreversible decisions are non-reversible and important decisions, while reversible decisions are decisions that can be made quickly and redone. For irreversible decisions, sufficient review time and multi-angled reviews are essential, while for reversible decisions, we emphasize rapid execution and necessary modifications.
The greatest value of this classification is clarifying “which process to apply.” When there are time constraints, we can make appropriate responses by calmly judging whether the decision is truly an irreversible decision or can actually be treated as a reversible decision.
As an even more important approach, it is also possible to divide “irreversible decisions” into multiple “reversible decisions.” This is similar to the relationship between waterfall and agile development. For example, we can transform the irreversible decision of selling 100 tickets at once into multiple reversible decisions of selling them in five batches of 20 tickets each. While canceling sold tickets or changing prices is nearly impossible, we can observe the results of the first 20 ticket sales and adjust sales methods or announcement timing to reflect in the next 20 tickets. Also, whether to increase capacity after sellout is a reversible decision that can be chosen later.
Organizational Management That Makes Time Our Ally
The core of “systems taking responsibility” organizational management is making time our ally. In many organizations, time constraints create concentration of responsibility on individuals. In situations where “we must decide now” or “someone must take responsibility,” specific people end up bearing heavy burdens.
However, we take a different approach. When important decisions are needed, we first ask “do we really need to decide right now?” In most cases, we find there’s room for adjustment of several days to weeks. Using that time to hear more people’s opinions and examine from various angles allows us to make decisions without regret.
Working Out Loud practices make decision-making processes visible, allowing all members to understand progress. This enables early problem detection and constructive discussion.
Learning and Growing as an Organization
When problems occur, instead of blaming individuals, we treat them as system improvement points, promoting growth as a learning organization. We recognize that deciding not to act or changing approaches are also valuable actions, creating a culture that values appropriate judgment-based non-action as valuable contribution.
By recording and visualizing decision-making processes, we ensure transparency that can be verified later. This clarifies “why we made that decision” and promotes organizational learning. Systems exist to support people, and we carefully design them so people aren’t overwhelmed by systems.
Conclusion
The essence of “systems taking responsibility, not people” organizational management is taking time for everyone to review together. When making important irreversible decisions, instead of someone steeling themselves to make personal decisions, we adjust schedules to secure review time and opportunities. We create an environment where all members, including both proactive and cautious individuals, can participate freely and constructively in reviews.
This approach also significantly reduces the burden on the Chair. By being freed from the pressure of individual decision-making and having responsibility distributed through collective review systems, the Chair can focus on the overall direction of the organization.
When conducting reviews and soliciting opinions, it’s also important to set clear deadlines. By providing specific timeframes such as “please provide your feedback by [date],” we help participants plan their contributions and encourage constructive participation. This ensures that the review process itself proceeds efficiently while maintaining appropriate time management for decision-making.
In this way, the final decision becomes “the result of everyone’s consideration” rather than “an individual’s judgment.” Responsibility is borne by the entire process rather than specific individuals. This is the foundation for sustainable and inclusive organizational management.
Through such organizational management, PyCon JP 2025 will create an environment where all members can contribute with peace of mind and create valuable events for participants. When in trouble, don’t bear it alone - utilize the system of reviewing together.
Update History
- 2025-07-12: Initial publication