Proposal #29: Level up our reward contribution system through a Self-Management Institute workshop

Dear Octo Human,
Beware! Moloch has appeared. It is within ourselves. The only way to win this level is through collective effort. I know you have come here due to resonating with the need of leveling up our game. Read carefully, this document is the proposal that Doug Kirkpatrick of D’Artagnan Advisors crafted by request of @HBesso31.

As a context, Doug is working to take Morning Star’s knowledge and practices to other organizations around the world through the Self-Management Institute. He already holds a general understanding of MetaGame.

Organizational Drivers and Scope

  • Achieving greater clarity and transparency regarding roles and responsibilities
    while maintaining the benefits of an adaptive and flexible organization.
  • Creating a resilient, effective, and strong network of peers based on flexible
    agreements and understandings.
  • Participation of the most active Players in the design and creation of the peer-
    agreement-based model that integrates MetaGame’s reward systems.
  • Delivering a model and lessons that other truly decentralized organizations can benefit of.

Work Overview

  1. Define the number of Players and their names (Discord handles) committed to participating in the workshop. These Players need to be from the different Guilds of MG, at a
    minimum: Builders, Designers, and Shillers. [Preparation]

  2. Invitation to each of the participants to identify with a team with which they will then form peer agreements. [Invitation]

  3. Online meeting (up to two hours) with the group of peers (participants) to share details about the content of the peer agreements, including Purpose, Services, Management
    Attributes, Decision Rights, Goals & Objectives, Measures, Resource Requirements,
    Motivational Style, Conflict Approach, Personal User’s Guide, Peers, Knowledge and
    Skills, Work Places & Times and Principles. We will allow sufficient time for in-depth Q&A and further instructions for creating draft peer agreements.
    Deliverable: A fillable resource for each Player. [Launch]

  4. Set up meetings and meet online with each team, one team at a time, and facilitate the
    development of peer agreements within each team. Set up subsequent online
    meetings as needed to finalize agreements. The aim is to have these completed by February 28, 2022. MetaGame will be requested to develop and deploy these agreements within the technologies used for maintenance, updating, and storage. [Development]

  5. As agreements are signed and completed, they will be reviewed for completeness
    and clarity to elevate shared understanding among peers. [Quality Assurance]

  6. When agreements are completed and electronically “signed”, it will be facilitated
    an online meeting for group celebration. [Celebration]

  7. Meet online as needed for six (6) months from the date of celebration to answer
    questions and provide additional consultation to sustain progress. [Sustainment]


A completed electronic Peer Agreement for each participating MetaGame Player on each
identified team detailing all important aspects of work, including Purpose, Services,
Management Attributes, Decision Rights, Goals & Objectives, Measures, Resource
Requirements, Motivational Style, Conflict Approach, Personal User’s Guide, Peers,
Knowledge and Skills, Work Places & Times and Principles.

Budget requested

$1,000 USD per Player participating. A 40% of the total amount should be paid upon signing the agreement. The remaining budget should be paid upon completion of the peer agreements.

Call to action
Register your interest in 1) getting this done and 2) participating in the workshop. From there, we can put up a vote.
Add your questions, concerns, as well as support to this proposal. Leveling up MetaGame is a challenge that only the bravest and committed Players can take. Are you one of the 300?

1 Like

Thank you for stepping up with this.
While I agree these things need to be resolved, I think getting consultants involved while there are still things we can do on our own is not necessary.
After we get the funding, it might make more sense to do this & go through the processes that we set up ourselves, but right now I think we can neither afford it nor is it necessary with actionable steps that we already have…

1 Like

I echo peths thoughts here. Really appreciate what you do @HBesso31 but this feels like a step too far. Reading all of that info just gave me flashbacks to working in the corporate world. Agreed we need to make improvements but imho bringing in consultants, needing a 20k budget is not an attractive solution at this time.

1 Like

We have expressed the need several times but then reject when there are proven methodologies to this problem by other decentralized orgs.

You say here:

And in #champions-ring:
“The result is that we’re all over the place.
When you look at outputs of our raids & guilds, a lot of it seems pretty random & not actually driving us towards any specific goal.
I think this is made so by a bunch of reasons: the bias towards short term contributors, the general encouragement of “just do whatever you want”, an action bias, a lack of a proper mission statement etc…
Overall, I’m not sure we create $150k of value we mint every month.

The way to be sure we create the value we mint is by following proven methodologies that have solved this before.

Otherwise, our efforts are based on maintaining the status quo of MG, complaining but not having the incentive design to actually improve the game.

You talked in another thread about skin in the game. I am so sure this is a correct path, that if others register interest I’ll pay for my own seat. That’s skin in the game.

Another thing,

SourceCred and other actors, such as Daniel Ospina, are acknowledging the same problem we have.
It might be powerful to bring these actors together, finance the experiment of algorithmic-supported letters of commitment to producing an ecosystem-wide building block that enables DAOs to support full-time contributors!

If we all find it as a way to go, we just need to list the obstacles and then we can solve them to get it done! It is just a matter of discussion, debate, and deliberation to find the ways forward!!

1 Like

Yes, but I also said:

Which are all options that don’t cost $1k per person & don’t take until March to implement…

To make it clear, I’m not saying that we should never do this nor that the lack of money is the only problem.
I just think its important to continue the “minimum viable solutions” approach & take it one step at a time. Try to do things that are within our reach, take the low hanging fruit & then we can get into paying consultants if still necessary.
Also not saying that we shouldn’t at least read through all of their documentation (I’ve already read the long post you shared) & try to implement parts of it ourselves, as imperfect as it may be.
This will also make it more effective for them to help us if we do need their help, because we’ll already have the basics figured out instead of starting from 0 with them…

I commend you for this & if you find at least 1 other player willing to do it, I’d say go for it & share learnings. Or maybe make another proposal where MetaGame would have to pay less?
I believe you are convinced this is the right path. I don’t know if it is but I’m convinced that its not the next step. Let’s find out who’s right!

I do really like this part :point_down:

I think DAOHaus is working on something similar but it would be good to have it outside of the platform…

I’ve rethought my bandwidth and priorities. Doing this alone is too much effort. I’ll organically support towards professionalizing our reward system, but cannot champion too many things at the same time.

I’ll update my Champion proposal with a strategy based on my own insights plus the feedback received from Innkeepers and people that have DMed me.

I echo both above