by 0x76fb13f00cdbdd5eac8e2664cf14be791af87cb0 (Matimio)
Process for Establishing Formal Working Groups
This proposal outlines the purpose and process for establishing formal DAO Working Groups.
Working Groups allow engaged members of the DCL community to collaborate and ultimately solve for the problems and opportunities identified in Pre-Proposal Polls. This proposal aims to formalize the process of creating community-led working groups following the passage of a “pre-proposal poll” and leading to the submission of a well-thought-out and socialized governance proposal.
The DAO Governance Proposal Stages outlined three distinct stages for identifying community stakeholder interests, socializing solutions, and developing a well-thought-out and implementable governance outcome. In many cases, however, this is not a seamless process, and the building of community consensus and researching impacts and implementation paths require coordination and collaboration across various distributed points of the Decentraland Community.
Governance as voting further has potential to create divisive community and political dynamics. First past the poll voting in particular can promote polarization and zero-sum engagements. Working within the constraints of our established governance process, it is thus extremely important to have a robust and participatory “decision-making process” such that the votes we table are representative to the greatest extent possible.
Working groups - “a group of people who investigate a particular problem and suggest ways of dealing with it (Merriam-Webster, 2022)” - aim to provide opportunities for community members to engage in productive discourse, and complex decision-making. Working groups also provide a forum for the support and engagement of experienced governance facilitators and other community stakeholders to help direct the group toward identifying and articulating a solution or set of potential solutions for broader community consideration.
Formalizing procedures for establishing and conducting working groups will create a transparent, consistent, and efficient model for moving from the identification of an issue toward the best effort at its resolution. This approach will be one way to tackle and escalate different issues toward concrete outcomes, but it will not become the exclusive one, since each community member will still have the possibility to adopt or choose other ways to channel their needs, discussions or concerns.
The proposed Decentraland DAO Working Group process is based on an adaptation of the Delphi Method. The Delphi Method is a research and decision-making methodology used to gather insights and opinions from a variety of experts and stakeholders, and is particularly well suited for distributed and decentralized contexts. The objective of the Delphi method is to generate consensus, and draw from our “collective wisdom” to inform our decision making process.
During active working groups, the DAO Facilitation Squad (or a representative from the working group) will share the status and stages of each active working group as a part of the regular agenda of bi-weekly Town Halls.
Decentraland DAO Working Groups will be carried out in the following steps:
- Successful Pre-Proposal Poll - Proposal passes the initial stage of the governance process, signaling sufficient community support for the allocation of DAO/Community time and resources for active facilitation.
- (1.1) Promote to Draft Proposal - A proposal that has passed the Pre-Proposal stage could be promoted to a Draft Proposal, without the creation of a working group. In other words, a working group is in no way a prerequisite for an initiative to move forward through the governance process. However, if an issue is overly complex or the division of opinions is such that proposal drafters believe broader inputs and insights would be necessary, a formal working group may be established.
Working Group Formation - There are two ways working groups can be formed. First, is through the promotion of a Pre-Proposal Poll to a Working Group by the author or a contributor to the poll. The second, is by a specific Pre-Proposal Poll aiming to establish a working group around a given issue, which may be put forward to the community by any Community Member, including DAO Operator or Committee Members.
Distributed Delphi Method - The Delphi Method is a structured process for obtaining expert/stakeholder opinions on a particular topic, in order to gather input and reach consensus on a particular topic. It typically involves several rounds of questionnaires or surveys, with each round building on the results of the previous round. The Delphi Method is useful for decision-making in a DAO as it allows for collection of diverse perspectives. Decentraland DAO’s Distributed Delphi Method includes the following steps:
(3.1) Facilitator Selection - Proposal author/contributors self-select or appoint a representative to facilitate the working group. See Annex A for the full role and responsibilities of the Working Group Facilitator. Unless specifically requested to abstain, a member of the DAO Facilitation Team will support the Working Group Facilitator(s), and may be selected by proposal authors to serve as the Working Group’s primary facilitator. If the designated Working Group Facilitator quits at any stage, a DAO Facilitator or a DAO Committee Member will fulfill the role and decide with involved community members if the working group should remain active.
(3.2) Call for Working Group Participants - A general call for Working Group participants will be issued via Discord, DCL DAO Twitter, and pathways for joining will be established, likely including integration with the Governance dApp from the Pre-Proposal Poll.
(3.3) Pose question or problem to the Working Group - The Working Group Facilitator will design and distribute the question(s) / problem to the group, for participants to respond to. This can be in the form of a single question, questionnaire, or survey.
(3.4) Solutioning - Participants submit their proposed solutions/responses in the form of written comments, open-ended questions, or other form as specified in the questionnaire/survey.
(3.5) Analysis and Reporting - The proposed solutions/responses are analyzed, grouped into categories and/or themes, summarized and shared by the working group Facilitator(s).
(Continued in Conclusion Section Below)
- (3.6) Solutioning (II) - A second round of clarifying questions is posed by the Working Group Facilitator. Members of the Working Group then have the opportunity to revise and tailor their responses, based on the summary of themes and categories, and adapted questions, repeating the process until a consensus is reached or a set of multiple potential pathways forward is developed - as determined by the Working Group Facilitator. In the interest of time, this process should not be repeated more than four times.
Working Group Synopsis Report & Round Table Discussion - The DAO Facilitation Team will lead, or support the drafting of a Working Group Synopsis Report, detailing outcomes of the Working Group. This report will serve as a record of the proceedings, and as a point of reference for future discussions and drafting of proposals around the issue. The report will be publicly shared and discussed in a Round Table format, including Working Group Facilitators and Participants.
Draft Proposal - A proposal that has passed the Pre-Proposal Stage and workshopped via the Working Group, may be published as a Draft Proposal by the original proposals Authors or Contributors. Once again, a working group is not a prerequisite for a Draft Proposal.
- (5.1) Proposal Feedback & Review - Proposal authors may share the Draft Proposal for review and feedback with the wider community in general, and Working Group Participants in particular, to ensure it is representative of Working Group outputs.
Impact & Implementation Pathways - The final stage of a the Governance process calls for a detailed assessment of the proposal’s impact and description of implementation pathways. At this stage, it is possible that impacts and implementation pathways have already been determined through the previous Delphi Method, have been devised by authors of the proposal, or require further workshopping to be determined. In case of the latter, a the Delphi process can be reiterated, using prompts focusing on proposal impacts and implementation pathways. Alternatively, the Working Group may continue through asynchronous, synchronous discussions to support more detailed understandings of impacts and implementation pathways.
Binding Governance Proposal - The goal of a working group is not necessarily to produce a binding governance proposal. The aim is to facilitate a process that builds consensus, rather than divisive, zero-sum voting. That said, when faced with a complex or divisive issue, a Working Group can assist with development of a well-thought out and implementable Binding Governance Proposal, where the impacts are clearly understood and articulated, and implementation pathways established prior to its passage.
- (7.1) Non-Binding & Automated/Augmented - All Working Group procedures and outputs are non-binding. When possible, the process should be automated and integrated into the existing governance dApp, such that there is a user journey for establishing and carrying out the process. These pathways will be described in detail in the Binding Governance Proposal - if this proposal passes the Draft Proposal stage.
Conclusion: Working Groups aim to expand our governance from a process of voting to one of decision-making. The formalization of this process with clear pathways for the collection and synthesis of information will assist us in devising well thought out and implementable governance policies.
Vote on this proposal on the Decentraland DAO