https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cajun_Navy
Or the anarchist collectives during the Spanish Civil War.
or the mutual aid org, Common Ground Collective, formed after Katrina:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_aid_%28organization_the...
but 'self organizing' is, to me....a bit of a fairy tale for children, not reality for adults. everything is on a sliding scale. like, if a former state senator organizes the first core part of the Cajan Navy, does that make it 'self organizing'? and, does it matter?
as for Agile and 'self organizing', i don't think anyone actually takes it seriously. people, bosses/managers, instructors, web pages, videos, CIOs maybe -- they might seem to be taking it seriously, or even claim to take it seriously, but about that most charitable way i could look at that is...it's just self-delusion, it's difficult to help or make people understand something when their salary depends on them not understanding it, etc.
or as commenter 'ah88' mentions, if you have a team already -- they can 'self organize' when presented with some problem/mandate -- i'm guessing that was the core part of the spirit of this agile principle of 'self organization', even if it was never going to be possible for most of the corporate world.
Now, it is an organized team, in most cases, but during play the better ones organize ad hoc to complete game tasks.
What is more fun is an ad hoc game with skilled players. Maybe with a skilled, but inexperienced player or two.
Form two teams, find a pitch and enjoy a match!
When I have been a part of this kind of thing, I have always found it remarkable how people come to know one another, test, explore, then solidify into the team that day.
When it works, it is beautiful.
A tech example might be pre-sales, app engineering type training. People get flown in from all over the place, and the better programs will group people together, give them a tough project, short deadline and GO!
I enjoyed one with a well known CAD / PLM company years ago.
Was a few of us, each with some unique skills, many overlaps in tech and sales. We were assigned a closing presentation to the PTC executives and it was tough! Packed about a weeks work into two long days, running into hotel rooms well into the night.
We clicked. It all started with each of us sharing our stories, some chatter about the project and our thoughts.
One member leaned more sales than tech. I could do both, but was good in the drivers seat riffing with the sales leaning person. The other two were solid tech and could make the heavy lift magic happen, and all of us fleshed out details, models, stories, etc.
We didn't just deliver a competent closing demo, and pitch. We delivered a damn good show and could, and the moment the exec's picked up on that, were forced well off the planned path, to which we handled that with every trick in the book.
For those who may not be familiar, enterprise software sales often is a difficult process requiring sales, pre-sales, tech and art / presentation skills all woven together into a compelling, high pressure interaction. Often several of these together makes a sale involving many parts of a company. Team sport.
The ad-hoc nature of this training was particularly good and is not always done. (And it should be to drive higher revenue) Training of this type takes additional high skill, multidisciplinary people who have been successful and willing, able to share and test others.
Doing that felt a lot like the soccer team experience, frankly.
I still have my exception handling and qualification materials from that course and they are some of the best and timeless in their relevance.
One last example might be a proof of concept, vetting simulation.
At the pivotal point in an enterprise sales cycle, the buying / steering committee will have to select a vendor. The vendors compete to show their solution.
These are intense engagements!
Usually, many departments are touched. Ops, engineering, manufacturing, service...
The teams formed to do these are often a big part of whether win or lose happens. They have to do a deep enough tech discovery to matter, understand the existing process well enough to simulate a better one punching well above expectations, and work well with people they may have never met.
During the engagement, things almost always go off script as the competing teams try to sandbag the others and factions within the target organization add to the mix hoping to see their preferred vendor win.
Each time I have been either a part of one of these, or the lead, whether we succeed is almost always a function of team acumen and potency, fluidity.
A great team will win even with a product that is not superior.
The common thread here is a group of people well aware of who they are and what they bring to the challenge.
When people are able to communicate and secure in whatever role they play, perhaps confident in the idea of being a team member sans judgment, and ego conflicts --the team that forms will pack a punch well above the weight class of it's individual members.