Method for Restructuring the DAO, suggestion from PM Guild

Governance
1

Summary:
Oakfloors and r_kusti presented the PM Guild proposal (below) for the GD on Monday, March 11th. PM Guild was tasked with writing a plan to be discussed on Monday, March 18th.

Background and purpose of this document

The PM Guild discussed the ongoing discussion about the future of BanklessDAO (bDAO) and we realized that we’re unsure how the process is structured. We (the PM Guild) know that there are people who have spent many hours thinking and working on the process and that our suggestions below have already been answered somewhere else.

This document aims to share our thoughts and initiate an open discussion on how the process could be managed. This document will not discuss bDAO’s future shape or form, only how we get to the place where we want to be.

Project Plan

  • We’d like to have a project plan for the process bDAO is in. We know it’s difficult to set a timeline with set dates for the different phases we’re going through. A plan will make the process more transparent.
  • A plan is also something we can discuss. We can find strengths and weaknesses and improve on them as we go forward.

One approach could be to use the double diamond approach:

Phase 1: “What do we want to do”

  • Discover what is important for the BDAO members
  • How
    • DAO-wide retrospectives (have already been started)
    • Discussions and/or retrospectives within guilds and departments
      • Discussion during weekly meetings or async on Figjam
    • In-depth interviews with some members
  • Narrow down what the bDAO members want
    • Develop statements as “bDAO is …”
    • Test what statements fit best using a DAO-wide survey

Phase 2: “How do we do it”

  • Ideate potential solutions that will give bDAO members what they have said they want
    • Include different approaches as described in phase 1
  • Narrow to a few solutions

Double Diamond

  • Explanation and critique of the double diamond: The limitations of the Double Diamond - Dan Ramsden - Design leader, information architect, content designer, magician
  • Remember to iterate between the first and second diamonds when needed. We need to re-frame the questions we’re trying to solve a few times through the process
  • We need to remember that although all participants may agree on a solution during a meeting, they may very well have a different understanding of that particular solution and what it entails. So processes like this will require re-adressing the topics we thought we agreed on.
7 Likes
2

I support this proposal, especially if the PM Guild runs this project, to avoid any suggested self-serving.

Secondly, I think there needs to be a timeframe for each group/guild/dept to discuss and consolidate ideas within their teams. To me, 30 days would provide discussions and consolidation back to the PM Guild, but at the same time, not to extend this project to the end of S10. Ideally, the DAO will understand where and how to go forward, before we go into S11.

6 Likes
3

Thank you @coffee-crusher

When you say 30 days, is that for the whole process, and all questions on who bDAO is going to be, how we’re organized, governance model, etc. are answered?

I’m writing the updated version of this proposal now (we’ll discuss it in PM Guild before Monday) and I will suggest the exploration of who we are lasts until the end of S10 while S11 focuses on how doing it (eg. governance, organization, etc.)

3 Likes
4

I’m thinking 30 days from the start of when the guild/project/dept leads are contacted by the PM Guild about this project and ends when the Leads respond with their group’s feedback and comments. The consolidation of the reporting back from each dept/guild/project will take additional time and recommendations to the community via the Governance dept and CC’s.

2 Likes
5

I’m supportive of any effort to gather and document member sentiment. Also: I have worked with both contributors in the past and they are great!

5 Likes
6

As part of defining the problem, is there a common agreed set of facts wrt constraints? The double diamond encourages both imaginative approaches but the constraints (eg DAOstewards hitting the lack of talent pipeline) determine what needs to be scratched.

Also the diamond misses the time element (xref 3 horizons) … are you looking for a “solution” achievable in
a) current season
b) within financial year (eg chainsaw-AI style as to what projects/guilds to drop)
c) roadmap to sustainability within 3-5 yrs

2 Likes
7

This is a good point.

From what I can see atm the discussion seems to be just handing in a vacuum, with nobody accountable for taking it forward and no timeline.

What’s the deadline for answering each question?

2 Likes
8

Thanks for the input and article (3 Horizons) @drllau and @mgoesdistance. I will update the proposal as it was presented to the Governance Department on Monday, March 18th.

With regard to timeline and accountability. The PM Guild is responsible for following the outlined plan (see updated proposal). And the timeline for the first diamond is the end of S10.

It’s important to have realistic ambitions on this. This proposal can easily grow way out of what we have resources to handle.

1 Like
9

Updated proposal Plan for inclusion of guilds, departments and individual bDAO members in restructuring the DAO

1 Like