There is no moderated or compromised solution. The proposal either goes in front of the grants commitee or it doesn’t depending on the votes
1 Like
We need to stop beating around the bush about being repetitive, don’t waste funds, it is a bear market, we don’t have time for this etc etc. Where is the link to the Ops Guild Sentiment Survey? Does it go to contributors outside bDAO? If not, what we have proposed is fundamentally different from design and objective
ahah yes - bDAO is hard to keep up with.
yes - it is the same survey he mentioned.
it is the Coordinape monthly survey everyone has to take to be included in the Coordinape round and the results are sent out about a week after closure of the round
hope this helps
1 Like
im not sure what you mean. we dont have time for what?
im not sure what the bear market has to do with this. could you expand?
it does seem to me that you are asking for large amount of BANK to ask for to fund this project in comparison to the funding most bDAO projects receive
the ops survey does not go to contributors outside of bDAO. however, if yours does, why should bDAO fund the entirety of your project if it is repetitive inside of bDAO? sentiment analysis is super important for DAOs and I think you could get really good traction starting in other DAOs.
just doesn’t make sense for bDAO to fund this IMO
1 Like
please see the latest ops sentiment analysis here: cNPS Survey Results - Season 4 Month 2
find others here: Notion – The all-in-one workspace for your notes, tasks, wikis, and databases.
I’ll just touch on this because I think it’s important: I believe that bDAO having connection/insight into the broader DAO ecosystem could certainly help us achieve our mission of creating user-friendly onramps.
Onramps have to go somewhere, and IMHO, other DAOs are an ideal place to funnel contributors. Beyond that, getting people interested in DAOs could be done by showing how DAOs contrast with traditional fiat organizations. For instance, Gallup does an annual “Global state of the workplace”, perhaps we could show how DAOs solve some of these problems.
I truly believe that if we want bDAO to succeed, we need to be outward facing. We need to represent all DAOs to the outside world, not just bDAO. Just my humble opinion.
8 Likes
Exactly that. Thanks a lot links. Much much appreciated. This is what the proposal is, and without over simplifying the intent was along the lines of “BanklessDAO State of the DAO Contributor Ecosystem”. But this broader vision seems to have been completely lost
2 Likes
Thank you to everyone who has read through and responded to the proposal. Really appreciate those who have voted in support, we will try our best to ensure that there is a great output for bDAO. Let me also add to the responses of @homie and @sandeepdas9179, basically appears to me that there is a misunderstanding.
RunTheJewelz, saulthorin, Ella.Dane, Brustkern: This is NOT a DAO health check. We are NOT interested in what a specific DAO is doing right or wrong. Not that it is not important, it is just not the focus of our project. Our objective is to give a voice to the DAO contributor community, they are the hero of our study. Each contributor works across multiple DAOs and we want to understand their experience, expectations and challenges.
I had in fact run a health check for a DAO. However, I realized that no one is really going in depth to understand the DAO contributors. I checked around in bDAO and other places and found no study that tackles this issue. This led to a discussion and formation of our working group. We believe that if DAOs need to succeed, it is very important to treat the contributors as a critical stakeholder and get into their minds. And that Bankless is a good home to take up studies and issues at a larger industry level.
I have been on the other side, in my earlier roles. I worked for over a decade in marketing, launching and repositioning some leading brands. While I had internal customer surveys, I was always keen to understand the trends in the larger market, so I could capture new opportunities or spot oncoming problems. I am just trying to say that both sets of data have a role to play - internal studies specific to one’s project, industry level studies / data.
"links" had a great suggestion, to share what we have found till now. Sharing a glimpse of some early trends we see
-
As expected, a large share of DAO contributors appear to be contributing part time and working across multiple DAOs. Interestingly, till now the #1 motivator of working for DAOs appears to be earning money , with time flexibility and strengthening skillset at 2nd position - This should give all DAOs some food for thought around compensation
-
Only small share of people say they wholeheartedly recommend DAO working to others. For themselves, a good chunk of respondents say they plan to commit the same amount of time in next three months, only a small share say they plan to increase their time commitment – So while DAOs generally assume there will continue to be a great supply of freelancing talent, it appears that the talent is still in an evaluation mode, and added to it is a slowing crypto market
-
A good percentage of respondents prefers DAOs to list bounties, tasks, etc. This can be a good cue to DAOs, as there are several that do not have strong or well-organized bounty boards
-
These are just some high-level analyses. Once we have a large number of respondents, we can do a lot of cuts and cross references as well
Brustkern: Great to be connected. I had gone through the NPS surveys for bDAO when we started this project. Let me attempt to address your concerns
-
As mentioned above, we are not focusing on bDAO
-
We are very conscientious about the funding. We have in fact put in a month of work and progressed to the funding request only when we were confident of the output
-
At today’s Bank price, we are asking for $1,200. I am sure you’ll appreciate that in no way is commensurate to the time we are putting in. Out of this about 1/3rd is not for us but for bDAO community incentive. On the analysis, we aim to do cuts and segmentations, and produce a PPT + a writeup
links: Thanks for the great points. Let me share some thoughts, please let me know if I am not clear or you would like more details on any aspects
- Yes you are correct, this ‘entire’ survey will not be repeated every 6 months. It has 2 parts
- The questions that will be repeated – satisfaction, recommendation, future intention of time contribution, etc
- A new area that will be explored in depth each time – We are currently seeking a broad range of inputs across challenges and motivations. Depending on the findings, in subsequent tracks we plan to focus on select issues and get more in depth
- We had done a beta questionnaire which we checked with 14 respondents. The questions were mostly ok but we had to tweak the scale. In beta we had questions with 1-9 rating scale in answers, but these were open to personal interpretation of respondents and led to difficulty in analysis. Therefore, we shifted to specific answers that respondents needed to select from
- We consciously stayed away from asking for names of DAOs as we did not want this to feel like a forum to compliant about or compliment specific DAOs. We thought including DAO names could skew responses
- Yes the 30K to fill the questionnaire is as affiliate links to bDAO members. It will be distributed to bDAO members for generating responses
- We cannot track fill rate. But till date we have had 0 complains on length or of dropping off
- And thank you for the fabulous suggestion on sharing some trends from the early responses
Ella.Dane: The funding amount is a subjective thing. But as you’ll see from the sample analysis above, a lot of work went into the questionnaire design and the analysis will also take a lot. The total funding is $1,200 of which ~ 1/3rd goes to bDAO community. On the matter of who funds it, I had in fact bounced it off someone else as a test. However, the entire team unanimously felt that bDAO should have the 1st right on it.
innov8tor3: I hope this helps clarify things a bit more
I hope this assuages the concerns and hope we can convert the no votes to yes.
I have done a consolidated reply in the interest of not spamming everyone’s timelines. If I have missed replying to any point, my apologies, it is unintentional. The team is available anytime for a detailed discussion. Please drop your comments here, DM us or join our discord.
6 Likes
Thanks homie. I appreciate what you’re doing to move the ball forward.
My comp suggestions would be:
0 BANK retroactive for the survey creation
0 BANK to motivate survey reponses, as survey should be intrinsically valuable
20K BANK for analysis each time it is conducted
Our first published survey was in Season 2, actually, though the concept was birthed in Season 1.
All surveys bar one were posted here in the forum. They are as follows:
These surveys are conducted at the opening of every Coordinape round, and all questions are required. That is, to join the Coordinape round, one must complete the survey. We obtain approx 300 responses every month, making this survey extremely consistent and providing very strong quantitative measures over time. Plus, with an average of 2-4 qualitative questions, it’s quite light weight and low-burden. I think this process works really well.
Extending this beyond the bDAO could be a paid consulting gig, a revenue generator for us. That’s where my mind would go with this concept. But that’s quite different from what’s been proposed.
4 Likes
I would suggest cNPS as the cornerstone measurement, as the Ops Guild does.
1 Like
Dude. Not a personal attack. I’m criticizing the quality of the product and concept as presented, not the people who created them. We’re all on the same team here.
1 Like
Hey @Brustkern , Maybe our messages overlapped. We’ve explained the scope of our study in more detail. (Also the fact that we are NOT doing a study on bDAO)
I am sure you understand that NPS does not work for it. Btw, I have worked on NPS for a large organisation and think it is a great approach, it is just not fit for our use case.
Also just building on Ashish’s point @Brustkern, the objective of our survey is not to arrive at any single composite score (like NPS)…the industry has a lot of it. We want to use the survey data to create a range of insights, which is why our questions are not a long list of statements to be answered on a scale. We intend to create a report / publication with bDAO branding, enhancing our thought leadership in the space. @links mentioned a relevant example of the Gallup State of the Workplace report. We are intending to do something along those lines
And yes, to your point as an additional revenue earner for bDAO, if after the publication of the report, any DAO approaches us for a private project, we will do it only for them and give them the insights
I will take a web2 example - Interbrand does the Best Global Brands ranking every year out of their own investment. It is a brand valuation currency. Companies then approach them to conduct their own private valuations, which Interbrand does for a cost / consulting engagement. For us the publication of the report is akin to the Best Global Brands ranking, and that subsequent private valuation request is akin to your consulting gig example.
Thank you. This helps clarify a lot, particularly Ashish’s take-aways from your early responses.
I could get on board this project if I felt that:
- the question bank is going to generate real, usable insights
- the study was repeatable, scalable and had ample opportunities for sample-set growth, and
- it could either be self-funded through revenue, or be funded as a community good via Gitcoin.
I’m a little surprised that NPS isn’t relevant here. Wouldn’t the question be “On a scale of 1-10, how likely would you recommend working for a DAO to a friend or colleague?”
My pref on these is to have a blend of proper quantitative questions and open-ended qualitative questions.
4 Likes
Thank you @Brustkern . Sharing some thoughts on your 3 questions
-
Just 40 respondents have given the 1st cut of insights shared in thread above. We believe there will be much more rich insights with a larger number of respondents. We have also kept usability in mind while designing the questionnaire. For each question we had a requirement that it should be practical and useful, so basically each question/answer should provide DAO builders something to think or act upon
-
Oh yes, the thought is that this is a repeatable and branded property. And if we move first, we own the mindspace for DAO contributor ecosystem study. The potential sample set is the DAO contributor community, which is big. On scale, there should hopefully be several possibilities once the study is established, we should be careful in selecting the ones that do not dilute our brand
-
We can look at revenue options in future. One possibility is that some part of the report is free while a deeper dive is available for purchase (a standard practice within research). Another possibility is sponsorship / co-branding. The current launch round is a low investment, our initial budget was ~$6k, currently pitching for $1.2K. We are hopeful it should pay back in revenue or brand equity to Bankless
Yes I agree that NPS scale could be used for satisfaction and recommendation. We were apprehensive that respondents could interpret the ratings in different ways. There is also variances in ratings in different geographies (some tend towards higher side, some towards median, etc), we were not in a position to normalize for this.
We had actually started off with 1 to 9 rating scale and then moved to specific answers. We could be wrong but we thought this would bring more specificity to the answers.
Hope these answers make sense. It will be great to have you support the project.
1 Like
Just sharing one more thought @Brustkern
@sandeepdas9179 had a nice idea. That we build an index or a derived score, which can become a Bankless DAO IP. We decided to see the output from the 1st tracker to see potential interconnectedness and maybe if something like this can be developed.
You have a good understanding of research and DAOs. Why not join the effort to explore building a proprietary index or score for the next round
2 Likes
LOL i love it. thank you for the offer. I’m overcommitted so i have to say no, but I’ll be here in the corner taking pot-shots (kidding! kidding.) Cheering for you. I’m always available via DM, but again i’m way overcommitted across DAOs, projects and my own company to join this effort. Thanks for clarifying. I know it’s a pain in the ass to respond to all these challenges, but i hope in the end it’s worthwhile.
5 Likes
Defintiely does, thank you!
This has been super enlightening, having an actual discussion about this proposal.
I think something good can come from this