🗃️
Contributor Access Bundle DBs
/
Workstream Evaluations

Workstream Evaluations

Proposed By
Essential Intent
DAO Organization
Outcome
CHANGES REQUESTED
Proposal Date
Jan 13, 2023
Meeting Notes
Type
Structure
Last edited time
May 15, 2023
Meeting Notes:
Outcome: Changes Requested 🛠
Outcome Summary
A discussion will continue in thread before getting passed & move to async passing or will be brought back. Will also be brought to the steward council.
Proposal
  • Tension: Current evaluation format not ideal for increasing accountability to stewards for a number of reasons:
    • Workstreams essentially evaluating their own performance
    • Not a lot of context sharing with Stewards makes it hard to evaluate performance
    • Not a lot of engagement from Stewards
    • No way to easily track performance changes over time
    • OKRs are designed to be “safe” since they are used to measure performance
  • Clarifying Questions:
    • Kevin: Anonymity of responses
      • Wouldn’t be on chain
      • Anonymity optional available on Google Forms
      • Only Stewards should be answering this
    • Kris: Can contributors review?
      • Yes, contributors from other WS can review
    • Kris: For upcoming budget, potentially keep objective setting/review of the previous season? Nothing changes with the budgeting season?
      • No, red/yellow/green lights don’t ultimately judge WS performance
    • Jodi: what additional information would ws be responsible for sharing on a monthly basis and in what venue?
      • The purpose of this is to better share with Stewards and contributors around the DAO (currently we’re not doing this well)
      • Will develop over time
    • Joe: Is this proposal saying this is the end all be all place to look? Or have several different pieces to evaluate (these reviews, red yellow green light, etc.)
      • Current red yellow green light system is mostly WS based - can continue to use this for progress updates
      • For Steward providing input, this monthly survey would be used
      • No, this is not the only system
    • Joe: If we approve this, when would this go into effect? Can we review before this goes live?
      • Next step getting in touch with Karma to develop survey mechanism for us
    • Tigress: Do we have a test round planned to see about Steward engagement?
      • For a test round, we can test it out first just with Steward council
      • If it goes well, we can open it to wider Steward community
      • This testround ultimately should not have an effect on budgeting decisions
    • Janine: Do we think the ROI is worth how much time/effort is required from Stewards?
      • This will encourage us to be more communicate and transparent with Stewards
      • It’s not too much effort so long as we’re making an initial effort
      • Questions are pretty clear
  • Reactions:
    • Scott: Important to consider in general interaction w/ Stewards:
      • We think of it as 1 amorphous group
      • Certain Stewards have skillsets that are domain specific
      • Some are internal and some are external
      • When we think of feedback, how are we creating some sort of taxonomy of Stewards?
      • How do we make sure that when someone says XYZ, that not only do they have context, but they have previous experience in this domain that they’re reflecting on what the work was in this context
      • How do we use that idea to reinforce and improve the proposal
      • one other point, I think stewards will be most excited to answer are like start / continue / stop: - what is the workstream doing given its mandate that it shouldn't be - what shouldn't it be doing that they're seeing it do etc. this doesn't solve for the time problem but it does give them like the ability to be much more fluid in their evaluation
      • Scott says:but tl;dr I'd generally prefer that this be restricted to external stewards that meet a minimum context bar
      • Scott says:like we could imagine a scenario based on how the council was set up where julia from MMM is evaluating MMM
    • Kris: Agree with Scott
      • + contributors don’t know details of what other WS are doing
      • This will not always give a totally representative view
      • But we can go ahead so long as we give an option to do this in a non anonymous way
      • Eval criteria - urge that we have a moment to give final feedback on evaluation criteria
      • Even if we pass this proposal, still bring this to Steward council and ask for suggestions/tweaks
    • Nate:
      • Concerned about Steward’s ability to understand what a group is doing at a distance + doing it every month
    • Tigress:
      • Not fully convinced
      • Moving forward would like some sort of user acceptance test
    • Joe:
      • This is the wrong venue for this
      • This project will require budget
        • Should be on the DAO Ops budget
      • Good direction, though
    • Janine:
      • Still trying to understand the end goal of this
      • OKR? or Steward engagement?
        • Steward engagement, this seems cumbersome
      • It takes a lot of work to understand what other WS are doing
      • How can we share better at a high-level together, and hit the high-level OKRs together?
    • Kyle:
      • Safe to try
      • Lots of reasons it might not work, let’s see the output after 1-2 months
      • Set expectations: try not to spend more than 15 mins on this
    • Laura:
      • I love trying this internally within the DAO
      • Feedback amongst peers would be great to receive
      • For using this tool, maybe in a different way that is proposed
      • Feels like chicken before the egg problem:
        • Issue that is trying to be addressed
        • How sensemaking works within the DAO
        • No channels or rituals about how tha tlooks like
        • This could be a forcing function
        • Do we create information asymmetry and then test with this eval?
        • Or do we take an iterative approach: get feedback then try things
      • Bullish on getting feedback from everyone
      • Instead of red yellow green, would prefer % of completion
    • Kevin:
      • Super supportive
      • Wish I had feedback after the last steward call
      • Could also elevate good actors
    • Jodi:
      • Supportive
      • Esp with feedback from Steward council
      • Could be tested in next Steward monthly call
      • Could be a forcing f’n for how we report our spending month to month
      • This does not seem like a big addition if this is in the right forums
  • Amendments:
    • Only evaluation by Steward council that are nominated by WS and contributors
  • Objections?
    • Kris: 1 more feedback round from Steward council
    • Kris: object to this proposal with steward council only, this does not make sense to me
    • Scott: still have concerns over who is providing feedback
  • Passed?
    • No
    • Discussion will continue in thread before getting passed & move to async passing or will be brought back
    • Will also be brought to the steward council
🗃️
Contributor Access Bundle DBs
/
Workstream Evaluations

Workstream Evaluations

Proposed By
Essential Intent
DAO Organization
Outcome
CHANGES REQUESTED
Proposal Date
Jan 13, 2023
Meeting Notes
Type
Structure
Last edited time
May 15, 2023
Meeting Notes:
Outcome: Changes Requested 🛠
Outcome Summary
A discussion will continue in thread before getting passed & move to async passing or will be brought back. Will also be brought to the steward council.
Proposal
  • Tension: Current evaluation format not ideal for increasing accountability to stewards for a number of reasons:
    • Workstreams essentially evaluating their own performance
    • Not a lot of context sharing with Stewards makes it hard to evaluate performance
    • Not a lot of engagement from Stewards
    • No way to easily track performance changes over time
    • OKRs are designed to be “safe” since they are used to measure performance
  • Clarifying Questions:
    • Kevin: Anonymity of responses
      • Wouldn’t be on chain
      • Anonymity optional available on Google Forms
      • Only Stewards should be answering this
    • Kris: Can contributors review?
      • Yes, contributors from other WS can review
    • Kris: For upcoming budget, potentially keep objective setting/review of the previous season? Nothing changes with the budgeting season?
      • No, red/yellow/green lights don’t ultimately judge WS performance
    • Jodi: what additional information would ws be responsible for sharing on a monthly basis and in what venue?
      • The purpose of this is to better share with Stewards and contributors around the DAO (currently we’re not doing this well)
      • Will develop over time
    • Joe: Is this proposal saying this is the end all be all place to look? Or have several different pieces to evaluate (these reviews, red yellow green light, etc.)
      • Current red yellow green light system is mostly WS based - can continue to use this for progress updates
      • For Steward providing input, this monthly survey would be used
      • No, this is not the only system
    • Joe: If we approve this, when would this go into effect? Can we review before this goes live?
      • Next step getting in touch with Karma to develop survey mechanism for us
    • Tigress: Do we have a test round planned to see about Steward engagement?
      • For a test round, we can test it out first just with Steward council
      • If it goes well, we can open it to wider Steward community
      • This testround ultimately should not have an effect on budgeting decisions
    • Janine: Do we think the ROI is worth how much time/effort is required from Stewards?
      • This will encourage us to be more communicate and transparent with Stewards
      • It’s not too much effort so long as we’re making an initial effort
      • Questions are pretty clear
  • Reactions:
    • Scott: Important to consider in general interaction w/ Stewards:
      • We think of it as 1 amorphous group
      • Certain Stewards have skillsets that are domain specific
      • Some are internal and some are external
      • When we think of feedback, how are we creating some sort of taxonomy of Stewards?
      • How do we make sure that when someone says XYZ, that not only do they have context, but they have previous experience in this domain that they’re reflecting on what the work was in this context
      • How do we use that idea to reinforce and improve the proposal
      • one other point, I think stewards will be most excited to answer are like start / continue / stop: - what is the workstream doing given its mandate that it shouldn't be - what shouldn't it be doing that they're seeing it do etc. this doesn't solve for the time problem but it does give them like the ability to be much more fluid in their evaluation
      • Scott says:but tl;dr I'd generally prefer that this be restricted to external stewards that meet a minimum context bar
      • Scott says:like we could imagine a scenario based on how the council was set up where julia from MMM is evaluating MMM
    • Kris: Agree with Scott
      • + contributors don’t know details of what other WS are doing
      • This will not always give a totally representative view
      • But we can go ahead so long as we give an option to do this in a non anonymous way
      • Eval criteria - urge that we have a moment to give final feedback on evaluation criteria
      • Even if we pass this proposal, still bring this to Steward council and ask for suggestions/tweaks
    • Nate:
      • Concerned about Steward’s ability to understand what a group is doing at a distance + doing it every month
    • Tigress:
      • Not fully convinced
      • Moving forward would like some sort of user acceptance test
    • Joe:
      • This is the wrong venue for this
      • This project will require budget
        • Should be on the DAO Ops budget
      • Good direction, though
    • Janine:
      • Still trying to understand the end goal of this
      • OKR? or Steward engagement?
        • Steward engagement, this seems cumbersome
      • It takes a lot of work to understand what other WS are doing
      • How can we share better at a high-level together, and hit the high-level OKRs together?
    • Kyle:
      • Safe to try
      • Lots of reasons it might not work, let’s see the output after 1-2 months
      • Set expectations: try not to spend more than 15 mins on this
    • Laura:
      • I love trying this internally within the DAO
      • Feedback amongst peers would be great to receive
      • For using this tool, maybe in a different way that is proposed
      • Feels like chicken before the egg problem:
        • Issue that is trying to be addressed
        • How sensemaking works within the DAO
        • No channels or rituals about how tha tlooks like
        • This could be a forcing function
        • Do we create information asymmetry and then test with this eval?
        • Or do we take an iterative approach: get feedback then try things
      • Bullish on getting feedback from everyone
      • Instead of red yellow green, would prefer % of completion
    • Kevin:
      • Super supportive
      • Wish I had feedback after the last steward call
      • Could also elevate good actors
    • Jodi:
      • Supportive
      • Esp with feedback from Steward council
      • Could be tested in next Steward monthly call
      • Could be a forcing f’n for how we report our spending month to month
      • This does not seem like a big addition if this is in the right forums
  • Amendments:
    • Only evaluation by Steward council that are nominated by WS and contributors
  • Objections?
    • Kris: 1 more feedback round from Steward council
    • Kris: object to this proposal with steward council only, this does not make sense to me
    • Scott: still have concerns over who is providing feedback
  • Passed?
    • No
    • Discussion will continue in thread before getting passed & move to async passing or will be brought back
    • Will also be brought to the steward council