From Hierarchy to Heterarchy: Introducing the SPECL Matrix

Why

What inspired me to write about this is a growing dissatisfaction with traditional tools like the RACI matrix. Every time I’ve tried to use it, something felt off. It didn’t reflect how life and collaboration actually work — too rigid, too top-down, too linear. And more importantly, it felt blind to the deeper layers of human connection, feedback, and flow. So I started wondering: what if we had a tool that reflected how life actually happens — as a network, not a hierarchy? That search led me to bring together ideas from Deleuze, cybernetics, and partnership-based thinking to try something different.

In Simple Terms

The RACI matrix is a tool that helps people assign roles in a project:

• Who’s Responsible for doing it

• Who’s Accountable for it being done

• Who’s Consulted for input

• Who’s Informed once it’s done

It’s clear and useful for planning — but also kinda mechanical. It assumes people work in neat boxes, following orders, and that clarity comes from hierarchy.

But real life doesn’t work like that.

Teams are messy. Ideas evolve. Feedback loops matter. People co-create, influence each other, and wear multiple hats. The RACI model doesn't always capture that nuance.

So instead, imagine a new kind of matrix — called SPECL — where we:

• Support each other

• Partner as co-creators

• Evaluate through feedback loops

• Connect across boundaries

• Lead as stewards, not bosses

This way, we keep the clarity of “who does what,” but we also honor the reality of how things actually unfold in complex systems and human relationships.

Theory

The critique of RACI comes from multiple directions.

Deleuze & Guattari’s Rhizomatic Ontology argues that the world isn’t a hierarchy—it’s a web. There’s no “center.” Instead, things grow in many directions, simultaneously. Ideas, teams, and organizations behave like rhizomes—roots spreading underground, branching and reconnecting. You can also see them as waves rippling out into space and time.

Systems Thinking and Cybernetics (like Stafford Beer and Malik) show that viable systems rely on feedback, adaptability, and internal regulation. A rigid role system (like RACI) doesn’t always let a system respond fluidly to change.

Riane Eisler’s Partnership Model offers a third layer: we need to shift away from domination structures (top-down control) and into partnership cultures based on shared power, empathy, and collaboration.

The SPECL model blends all of these. It doesn’t destroy structure—it reimagines it as fluid, living, and co-created.

What I Think

I think the disadvantages of something like SPECL only seem like disadvantages because we're used to measuring them with outdated tools. It’s like trying to judge a poem with a calculator.

People resist new models because they don’t fit the dominant mental frameworks—but those frameworks are part of the problem. We use mental models to evaluate other models, which creates a kind of loop or tautology. It's hard to escape unless we radically shift perspective.

In Deleuzian terms, we need a line of flight — a departure from the current mode of thinking, into a new space of becoming. That means letting go of what has been and leaning into something fluid, local, intuitive, and alive. Creativity for creativity's sake. Innovation not as a product, but as a process of self-discovery and transformation.

SPECL, to me, is a small tool with big potential—it opens a space where teams can mirror nature: co-evolving, responsive, and guided by shared stewardship.

The Point

This isn’t just about project management—it’s about worldview. The way we structure our roles reflects how we see ourselves, each other, and the world.

SPECL isn't just a matrix. It’s a mirror of a different kind of reality:
One that’s fluid, alive, and inherently collaborative.
One that trusts the “man inside,” as Jung said.
One that sees leadership as stewardship.
One that invites radical co-creation rather than control.

And if we want to solve the problems of the future, maybe we need to stop using the tools of the past—and start inventing new ones that feel more true to who we are becoming.

Want me to turn this into a slide deck, workshop outline, or even a mini-guide for teams to use SPECL? Just say the word.