Organizational Structure of Iroquois Confederacy

Background of Iroquois Confederacy

Assignment
Much has been said about the inspiration of the ancient Iroquois “Great League of Peace” in planting the seeds that led to the formation of the United States of America and its representative democracy.

 

The Iroquois Confederacy, founded by the Great Peacemaker in 1142 ACE1 , is the oldest living participatory democracy on earth2. In 1988, the U.S. Senate paid tribute with a resolution3 that said, "The confederation of the original 13 colonies into one republic was in?uenced by the political system developed by the Iroquois Confederacy, as were many of the democratic principles which were incorporated into the constitution itself."

For this activity, read the article on PBS.org HERE(same as above) and try to think of what organizational structure type best suites the Longhouse People's Organizational Strata. Is it one, or another, or perhaps something that doesn't quite fit what we've described in this module? 

Post: Write what organizational structure you think best fits the Iroquois Confederacy and why that is.

Here’s what my classmates have already submitted.
When I took the time to research more into The Iroquois Confederacy, I came to the conclusion that this seemed to relate to the Classical Theory of Organization and had connections to some of its six main elements.  This theory mainly deals with the idea of employees being a part in the machine that is the business or organization and their ability to be efficient.  Though this theory does mainly deal with formal organization I think it can still be very applicable towards the concept at hand.  I will take time to share with you some of what I think are the stronger connections made between the confederacy and the theory I have chosen.  

To begin, we can look at the element of the span of control.  This can be seen in Classical Organizational theory by the evaluation of who is in charge of whom and how many people may be staffed under this person.   As I read in the PBS article provided to us, I learned from there that the Iroquois Confederacy and the Great Law of Peace declared that it would restrict how many office spots may be taken by members of the community as well as they declared who had the authority to declare war. They also still allowed nations to have their own independent leadership, but large decisions would be made as a whole nation.  This can be similarly related to the concept of the distribution of rights in the Classical Organizational theory as well as the limits of manager rights over employees.

United States and the Iroquois Confederacy

Secondly, we should discuss the relation to structure and co-ordination amongst the theory and the confederacy.  Both concepts place emphases on having a structure in place to help the flow of relations amongst the varying functions.  In the case of the Iroquois Confederacy, this confederacy aided the different Indigenous groups from all over be more efficient and effective in their dealings of labour, war, and more.  They placed emphasis on the use of branches of legislature to help structure their lives and aid in their peacekeeping efforts.  These concepts and important structures being placed can be a key important factor to the success of the various nations.

 

The final element that can be seen as partially relating to this theory would be the concept of division of labour.  As noted by Terry Hansen in the PBS article, “In the plains, there was a great honor in giving your horses to the poorest members of the tribe. The potlatch still practiced in the Paci?c Northwest is another example of voluntarily redistributing wealth to those who have the least.”  The Indigenous communities very much believed in carrying their worth forward to future generations, as seen in principles such as the Seventh Generation.  This could relate to the concept from the Classical theory of having the work for employees be spread out fairly so all may benefit from the business and work is completed. 

 

In conclusion, I do feel as though some of the elements of these two concepts at hand do relate as described, but not every single one.  it can be interesting to evaluate our history and the way people chose to organize themselves.  We nowadays have access to so much information to be able to make a decision and in the past, there was so much more trial and error for ideas, concepts, and more.  The fact that we were able to create complex systems or organizational structures without even really knowing what we were doing has me thinking about the future and what we could be doing now that could be revolutionized for humanity.  Do you guys have any ideas or comments about this?  Do any of you think about where and how theories could evolve in the future?

 

Another example: 
The organizational structure I feel best fits the Iroquois Confederacy would be that of the Matrix Structure. This is because within its structure there is no single higher up who holds all the power. Instead, responsibility is spread out between different groups within the whole structure. So in the case of the Iroquois Confederacy you have each nation (Mohawk, Seneca, Oneida, Cayuga, and Onondaga) who all collaborate when it comes to decision making. As quoted in the PBS article, “Each nation maintained its own leadership, but they all agreed that common causes would be decided in the Grand Council of Chiefs”. 

The Haudenosaunee Confederacy website explains this collaboration further. It describes how the Onondaga are in charge of the opening and closing of council meetings while when it comes to discussing policies, the Mohawk and Seneca take control. From there, the Oneida and Cayuga are consulted in order to confirm ideas being put to the table. At the end of the discussion, the Onondagas will take everything into consideration and make a decision.