Role-Based Guild Coordination Reorganization

Title: Role-Based Guild Coordination Reorganization
Authors: frogmonkee#6855
Squad: frogmonkee#6855 (Champion), bpetes#9961
Date Created: August 6th, 2021
Date Posted: August 6th, 2021


This proposal specifies a process for the election of 4 key roles to each Guild:

  • Guild Organizer
  • Talent Coordinator
  • Secretary
  • Governance Coordinator

Upon election of these roles, we kick-off meeting will be scheduled to clarify the scope and purpose of each role, after which guilds will be left to operate independently.

IMPORTANT: Please note that the proposal is suggestive, not prescriptive. At the end of the day, each guild will operate independently, meaning Guilds can choose to participate however they wish to. In other words, these four roles were inspired by similar needs across all guilds, but can be implemented in different ways.


With the launch of Season 1 last month, the DAO has run into a few operational roadblocks that are consistent throughout guilds. These roadblocks largely include coordination between different guilds and codifying existing responsibilities within guilds.

A model for decreasing friction was discussed in this forum post: Framework for Guild Coordination

Upon soft consensus on the roles presented in the linked forum post, this proposal moves towards implementation. Note that project coordinators were deliberately left out of scope, as they will tie into a possible Project Governance reorganization that is currently in the works.


DAOs are non-hierarchical, consensus-driven organizations. To scale BanklessDAO, we must have people dedicated to certain responsibilities. Doing so may seem like adding power structures, but this can be done in a non-hierarchical way.

In order to facilitate better coordination within the DAO, this proposal packages sets of responsibilities into four important positions that serve at the behest of the guild, not to direct its functioning.


The four roles were thoroughly explored in the previous forum post, but the cliffnotes are:

  • Guild Organizer: At the center of all guild administrative tasks. Responsible for meetings, CC updates, following up on action items, and the like
  • Talent Coordinator: People management within the Guild. Responsible for welcoming new members, scouting for new talent, and finding members with available bandwidth.
  • Secretary: Ops role within the Guild. Responsible for taking notes on meetings, tracking multisig inflow and outflows, maintaining Notion, and tracking reimbursements
  • Governance Coordinator: Helps guide Guild members through the governance process. Responsibilities include assisting and editing proposals, on top of governance changes, and increase engagement in Guild governance activities.

It is important to note that a single person can occupy multiple roles and a role can have multiple people.

A single person can occupy multiple roles – In the beginning, I suspect people will have multiple roles (eg. guild organizer and internal project coordinator may be the same person) A role can have multiple people.


This proposal aligns with the Ops Guild push for a Season 2 Specification, we recommend elections be held within the next two weeks: One week for deliberation and another week for voting - if this can be done earlier, even better!

Elections can be held as Discord polls, restricted to those with the appropriate Guild tags, just like this example here.

Important Parameters include:

  • :ballot_box_with_check: Allow Anyone To Add Poll Options
  • :x: Single Vote Per User (let members elect multiple members)
  • Role Restriction

This voting schema is a suggestion and can be modified based on how the Guild believes it should move forward.

Furthermore, guilds have the discretion to decide if a position will have multiple members (hence negating the single vote per user function). For example, Dev Guild may have multiple Talent Coordinators, but at their own discretion.

For guilds that will participate, these elections would be completed before the community call on August 20th.

Kick Off

Upon election, we wish to have a one-time kick-off call to scope out the responsibilities of the role. Guild Organizers, Talent Coordinators, Governance Coordinators, and Secretaries will all meet with their peer group to refine the scope of their roles and clarify any other items. This will happen at the beginning of each season. Similarly, a debrief meeting will happen at the end of each season.

A lettuce meet link will be sent out on August 20th to schedule for the following week, open to all, but focused on individual role responsibilities.


At the end of each season, re-elections can be triggered for one of three reasons:

  • Competing bid by another DAO members, either to replace or add a member to the role
  • Proposal to remove DAO member from their role
  • DAO member stepping down from role

If any of these three scenarios are met, elections will held as per the one-week election cycle outlined above. If these three conditions are not triggered, the existing DAO member will retain their role into the next seasons.


This proposal does NOT set compensation. However, it does request that all elected members track their hours worked over a month period after kick-off. This data can then be used to determine compensation going forward and retroactively compensated. This will happen at the guild level.

A sample calculator can be seen here using an hourly model. This does NOT have to be the model if a guild wishes to compensate differently.


Success can be measured by a before and after survey on satisfaction with guild operations. Survey will be put together and sent out on the August 20th community call. A follow up survey will be attempted at the end of Season 1.


  • Deliberate on this proposal
  • Hold elections for each guild. Not mandated, but recommended.
  • Host four separate kick-off calls on the week of August 23rd
  • Follow with DAO-wide coordination (kick-off) and elections
  • Let guilds manage role responsibilities on their own

0 voters

1 Like

Voting “guild’s rights” for now.

I like the framework and will push to deploy it in Dev Guild.

I just don’t know how ready we are to enforce roles rather than recommend the structure.

1 Like

I voted to ‘Let guilds manage role responsibilities on their own’ for now, because I think that the DAO should provide guidance and be prescriptive as to the context of roles(how they occur) but only be suggestive towards types of roles. I think it should be this way to enable guild individual creativity and flexibility as to their design.

I feel reluctant to agreeing to a soft consensus vote here, because I want to be clear on the specifics we would be agreeing to and reading this I’m not 100% clear.

What I would like more clarity on is in agreeing to this, we would be agreeing to:

  • Create whatever roles we want, although these are recommended?
  • 2 meetings a season among these roles?
  • Tracking our hours?

Ultimately what I want to enable is flexibility, creativity, and equitable efficiency, while avoiding bureaucratic overhead.

Examples of Prescriptive towards the context, in that roles should:

  • Be elected
  • Have at least 2 members to be voted on
  • Have a consecutive term limit
  • Have specific, clear responsibilities defined
  • Etc…

But as to the roles, I think guilds should define themselves based on their needs.

Could the voting options be rephrased? I interpreted the choices to be whether voting would be done by each guild or DAO wide.

Please see the new draft: