[Archived][DRAFT] DAO Operators

Authors: Colin4ward, Erik_Knobl

Background: https://forum.developerdao.com/t/draft-increase-the-may-june-short-term-allocations-for-retaining-core-staff-due-to-market-changes/2090/3

Timeline

  • Posting in Forum in Draft form: Wed 8 June
  • Move to Forum vote: Wed 15 June
  • Move to Snapshot vote: Wed 22 June
  • Submit nominations to Snapshot: Wed 22 Jun
  • Candidate vote in Snapshot concludes: Wed 29 June

Summary

There is currently no regulation around Paid Employees for D_D. While being a strategic position, there is no definition on: What is the scope of the role? How to become one? What tasks each one of them should perform? How should they be rewarded? How should they coordinate with the rest of the DAO?
This initiative proposes the role of the Core Operator, for members with highly specific and strategic tasks, defined by the DAO, for the improvement of the community as a whole.

Scope of Work

Core Operators are members dedicated to the improvement of Developer_DAO, and rewarded by the DAO for their contributions with a monthly salary. They carry the highest degree of accountability for the success of the DAO in that they are expected to foster the culture of the collective, do the strategic planning, and drive the execution of work towards our goals.

Each Core Operator role should have the following definitions:

  1. Job Description. Definition of the scope of the role.
  2. Obligations. Activities the Operator does in the course of the role.
  3. Measurable Goals. Defining success; outcomes for the DAO, guilds and initiatives.
  4. Temporality and Salary.

Budget Stewards are the Core Team and the top 5 verified members from our early contributor rewards round, chosen by DAO members. This asks them to initiate the hiring process by analyzing a need for the DAO.

What is the process of hiring Core Operators?
Operator candidates will be proposed by Budgets Stewards and voted on by the membership. Each position would become its own proposal with candidates as the voting options.

How do Core Operators work in relation to the other members of the DAO?
Core Operators are expected to lead the DAO towards the achievement of the goals they have been hired to accomplish, coordinating guilds, projects and individual members that may be needed.

How are Core Operators paid?
Their salary will be a base of USD amount, with $CODE incentives depending on achievement of KPIs. This proposal recommends valuing the positions in USD and then replacing 30% of that with $CODE equivalent.

How does the DAO hire Operators for S1?
The DAO will hire Operators when it has funds, which is expected to be the start of S1. Efforts are underway to bill S1 sponsors in advance. In the case that the DAO does not have funds available, each paid operator will have a percent of salary deferred equal to the budget deficit. Deferred salaries will be accrued and paid when the DAO has funds.

Initial Core Operator roles:

Coordination Ops

Accountable for overall organizational process excellence, building internal coordination between guilds and projects.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Improve internal coordination and champion process improvements accordingly.
  • Establish monthly cadence for town halls and DAO coordination meetings.
  • Envisioning, definition and creation of Operations Guild for S1.
  • Deliver plans to increase and encourage decentralization efforts in S2.

KPIs:

  • Complete and maintain the legal background for Foundation.
  • Complete and maintain the legal background for revenue-generating projects.
  • Create an internal database of the membership.

Rewards:

  • $8,000 monthly dollars, for one season.

Community Guild Lead

Accountable for the overall engagement of members of the DAO.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Establish minimum viable contribution model for $CODE eligibility
  • Deliver documented onboarding process & KPI for measuring it’s success
  • Deliver plans to increase and encourage the diversity of the membership and leadership of the DAO in S2.

KPIs:

  • Onboard 350 new members (>3/day)
  • 100 documented minimum viable contributions

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $5,000 monthly dollars, for one season.

MBD Guild Lead

Accountable for increasing revenue with external relationships.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Develop a partnership pipeline with qualifying factors for paid and unpaid partnerships.
  • Deliver S2 sponsorship package at end of S1
  • Request for financial support template that enables initiatives to request funding solicitations

KPIs:

  • $50k/month in S1 sponsorship
  • 95% fulfillment on sponsorship obligations

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $5,000 monthly dollars, for one season.

Gov and Treasury Guild Lead

Accountable for managing the strategy for $CODE

Tasks to deliver in Season 1:

  • Develop a comprehensive treasury strategy, with a proposed $CODE burn rate, buyback schedule, and optional mint rate.
  • Model 12 month DAO cash flow, updated once per quarter. Due by the second week of S1.
  • Refine budget application and approval process.
  • Guide discussion on $CODE delegation process.

KPIs:

  • Final S1 treasury balance within 15% of proposal
  • Define Delegation process (if any) by Snapshot vote.

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $3000 monthly dollars, for one season.

Dev and Education Guild Lead

Accountable for educational and mentorship efforts

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Mentor qualifications, commitments schedule, and budget (hourly?)
  • Proof of competence qualification for mentee hours
  • Education plan for qualified members including portfolio-ready outputs.
  • Manage process for School of Code.

KPIs:

  • 6 onboarded, qualified mentors
  • 30 PoC verified contributors
  • Snapshot approved education plan

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $7000 monthly dollars, for one season.

Design and Product Guild Lead

Accountable for DAO branding, merch and DAO NFTs, support of revenue generating initiatives.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Complete and maintain the D_D website and derivatives.
  • Deliver revenue generating projects for merch and official DAO NFTs.
  • Deliver plans for a Consulting Workstream for the DAO.

KPIs:

  • Deliver a revenue generating official NFT project for the DAO.
  • Deliver a line of merch for S1.

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $5,000 monthly dollars, for one season

Writers and Media Guild Lead:

Accountable for diversifying DAO media efforts.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Deliver Scribe program for the whole DAO.
  • Deliver funded Newsletter proposal.
  • Deliver funded Blog Proposal
  • Oversee process to help members create a regular new media platform.

KPIs:

  • $10k Newsletter revenue
  • $5k Blog Revenue
  • 80% of Guild and funded initiative meetings scribed

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $3,000 monthly dollars, for one season.

Fundraising Ops:

Accountable for support of grants applications for projects and the DAO.

Tasks to deliver for Season 1:

  • Establish a documented process for qualifying projects for grant applications support under Developer DAO banner
  • Establish a documented pipeline of grant sources and build relationships with those granting entities
  • Complete submission of 6 grant applications for qualified projects
  • Fundraise for DAO endowment

KPIs:

  • 50% of applications received funding
  • $30k of total grant funding for projects
  • $100k of endowment funding
  • Qualifying process approved via snapshot

Temporality and Rewards:

  • $6,000 monthly dollars, for one season.
9 Likes

wiseTy here,

What is the process that budget stewards will use to determine the nominations for members to vote on? If a member wants to be nominated by budget stewards what does that process look like for that member?

Also, it doesn’t explicitly state whether or not these DAO operators are full-time or expected hours. I’m assuming full-time since the draft mentioned a monthly salary for the duration of the season.

Really excited that we’re moving forward with this!

What is the process that budget stewards will use to determine the nominations for members to vote on? If a member wants to be nominated by budget stewards what does that process look like for that member?

Do you think we should define the specifics, or just recommend a process open to the community? I would imagine the use of the DDIP process for the role, then a window to allow individual (open?) nominations, followed by selecting three persons to be voted. What do you think? Any suggestions?

Also, it doesn’t explicitly state whether or not these DAO operators are full-time or expected hours. I’m assuming full-time since the draft mentioned a monthly salary for the duration of the season.

This is intentional. The focus in on the goals and KPIs, and not in the time used. We want efficient Operators delivering results.

1 Like

I definitely think it should be a process open to the community. DDIP process seems appropriate.

  1. Create a thread in discord to discuss what role one wants to be nominated for.
  2. Get a minimum 5 of members that agree that you should be nominated?
  3. Move the nomination to forum for draft proposal?
  4. Budget Stewards pick which ones to be nominated based on what they’ve done in the prior season/off-season?
  5. Members vote on who will be selected.

I think there should be an option for co-guild leads, especially for Dev & Community guild can be a lot of work (main ones I’m experienced in). Both would share the responsibility & work together on toward goals. This would reduce burnout, sustain mental health, and I hypothesize, get better results. Both would evenly split the monthly salary.

I’m interested in hearing any caveats to this.

2 Likes

I definitely think it should be a process open to the community. DDIP process seems appropriate.

Yes, but I would expect the process to be owned by the Budget Stewards, and interested persons to nominate in a specific channel/thread. Otherwise, if 10 persons nominate themselves for each position, we would have a massive amount of threads, and forum posts.

2 Likes

I think there should be an option for co-guild leads, especially for Dev & Community guild can be a lot of work (main ones I’m experienced in). Both would share the responsibility & work together on toward goals. This would reduce burnout, sustain mental health, and I hypothesize, get better results. Both would evenly split the monthly salary.

Sounds like a great option for Budget Stewards to explore. Processes like this require new ideas, and iterations to improve.
Possible caveats: Two perfect candidates may not work well together. Perhaps we define obligations for each one? Or allow teams of 2 persons to nominate themselves too?
Another impact of this option is that can become a compromise choice for Budget Stewards to try to get as many people in a role, instead of making a firm decision. I don’t think that would happen now, but a possibility to contemplate in the future.

Please link the DIP for the Budget Steward role or adjust title to also legitimize that criteria.
(It might be just me, but I don’t remember contributor rewards to have associated role allocation.)

Edit: I agree with it, it’s fair and opportune given the current state.

This is exactly what I was thinking. They would nominate themselves jointly, preferably already having an idea of how they would share responsibilities.

I would not really recommend putting two people together by force if you will. If two members would like to do it together with a clear understanding of responsibilities, they can be nominated as a pair for co-guild leads.

1 Like

Great job! A few questions and suggestions.

Community guild lead:

Would add “& KPI for measuring it’s success” to it, as we’ll need some measure to use in order explore how to further improve the process.

What do we count as an onboarded member? Should they be constantly contributing, should they be active, should just go through the onboarding process?

MBD guild lead:

Feel like I misunderstood something, shouldn’t requests for funding go to treasury guild? Would be grateful for clarification on what was meant here.

Design and product guild lead:
Currently the product project doesn’t really function. Do we want the guild lead to “wake it up from the dead”? If not, then should it be in the title?

General:
What were the considerations for the rewards sums? The fluctuate between each guild leader but it is not specified why.

Thanks again for the great job and the very clear and thorough proposal!

2 Likes

Please link the DIP for the Budget Steward role or adjust title to also legitimize that criteria.

This concept is taken from this proposal:

This is the specific part:

Gain support of a Budget Steward: for S1, a Budget Stewards Committee is being created. The committee’s first members are the guild leaders and the top 5 verified members from our early contributor rewards round, chosen by DAO members. A Budget Steward role will be created on discord and discourse to identify these people. Budget Stewards cannot support their own project.

Should it be a specific DDIP?

1 Like

Would add “& KPI for measuring it’s success” to it, as we’ll need some measure to use in order explore how to further improve the process.

Good one. Added.

What do we count as an onboarded member? Should they be constantly contributing, should they be active, should just go through the onboarding process?

True. I think having this definition should be part of the requirements for the onboarding process.

Feel like I misunderstood something, shouldn’t requests for funding go to treasury guild? Would be grateful for clarification on what was meant here.

Yes, you are correct. Perhaps @Colin4ward can provide a better explanation of the goal here.

Currently the product project doesn’t really function. Do we want the guild lead to “wake it up from the dead”? If not, then should it be in the title?

The Product project and Design Guild overlap in this area. If the Product project is back, Design can collaborate with them. In any case, we need PMs input, and it’s important that an Operator works to deliver that to the DAO.

What were the considerations for the rewards sums? The fluctuate between each guild leader but it is not specified why.

Strategic importance for the DAO, time expected to be invested, and rough market value. This is a topic where I strongly urge everyone to provide more opinions so we can be more accurate, and fair for the operators and the DAO.

Thanks a lot for the feedback!

1 Like

I can definitely help with this part.

2 Likes

Thanks, I guess that has to pass first? Budget Steward (nominates) > DAO Operator.

This is a lot to follow and put in perspective. I’m surprised there’s nothing like a standard DAO constitution generator. Would make things much easier and set expectations.

If you guys feel like the Budget Steward role is here to stay and should be assigned on the basis of seasonal $CODE rewards (would alter the character of coordinape circles), then I would say it needs its own DIP. Not sure if we even have a DIP that specifies that each season will have a dao-wide circle. …I think that’s also a stepping stone if we are to allocate roles through it.

It’s my general vibe that that specific part should pass through governance. But as things are, I don’t see it being a problem anytime soon.

1 Like

The idea behind this is that there would be a standard way for projects to give MBD the information they need to solicit funding from sponsors. Similar to the idea that projects could let the fundraising lead know that they are looking for grant funding.

That there is a need for a structured organization to drive this forward is clear. That said, would be good to clarify:

  1. By what process will the position holders be identified? How does that become ‘permissionless’ and independdent? Otherwise, cabals controlling the DAO is possible (have seen it in many places). Ensure that the power vests in the members and not in any cabal/ politburo!
  2. If CODE is volatile, then convert CODE to USD equivalent. volatility in price cannot be the reason to change the number of CODE provided. This flexibility in the value of CODE is a given. Else, the treasury should simply convert CODE to $ and provide that as compensation. It has to be one or the other.
  3. There is a long list of cost items. What is the project revenue. Who drives it? How? Would be good to see a P&L and projections. What happens if the revenue falls short? Why should the cost lines not be aligned with revenue goals? If you fall short, you take a smaller variable compensation? So, I am saying that there should be a variable $ component in the compensation
1 Like

So this request is in case we’re trying to get a grant for a specific project? If yes, 100% makes sense!

If we’re talking seasonal sponsors, as far as I know they are not aware for purpose their money is going to go (as they are paying for content / marketing platform).

  1. What if the number of CODE is agreed upon before the season and being updated only next one when potentially new leads are chosen. It will remind a classic RSU mechanism. At a start of a contract the amount of RSU is determined on the current stock price and the desired compensation, the employee takes a gamble whether the stock goes up or down.
  2. Not all projects have revenue. I even would say that most of them don’t, and are funded by the seasonal sponsors (see MBD KPIs).
    Totally agree with you that the guild leaders should be accountable for achieving the KPIs, but we shouldn’t forget that there are things outside their influence that can determined achievement of the KPIs (for example how can one onboard 350 people if only 300 joined the DAO in that time). So would urge to take that into account as well.

By what process will the position holders be identified? How does that become ‘permissionless’ and independdent? Otherwise, cabals controlling the DAO is possible (have seen it in many places). Ensure that the power vests in the members and not in any cabal/ politburo!

Yes. That’s one of the main goals, give the membership the power to vote on the operators. The nomination part is given to Budget Stewards, and all the DAO votes on those nominations.

If CODE is volatile, then convert CODE to USD equivalent. volatility in price cannot be the reason to change the number of CODE provided. This flexibility in the value of CODE is a given. Else, the treasury should simply convert CODE to $ and provide that as compensation. It has to be one or the other.

I think we should eventually move to giving all rewards in $CODE. But the main feedback we collected is that at this point, the rewards for operators should be mainly in USD, to avoid the problem we had with GTC.

There is a long list of cost items. What is the project revenue. Who drives it? How? Would be good to see a P&L and projections. What happens if the revenue falls short? Why should the cost lines not be aligned with revenue goals? If you fall short, you take a smaller variable compensation? So, I am saying that there should be a variable $ component in the compensation

IMO, This is the main pain point at the moment. How do we pay salaries if the revenues are not what we expected? We added a clause there, but perhaps is not enough. Strongly invite you to share ideas.
Your other point is also good. If the ops fails to deliver on KPIs, should we remove the $CODE incentives, for example? Half of it?
These are good questions. I would be really interested in adding specific suggestions to solve these issues. What do you think we can add?

Yes, for specific projects!