I have observed and been deeply involved in several DAO. Currently, there are many types of DAO, from investment-oriented ones to those with the mission of incubating projects, and a collection of communities and KOLs. I can sense the advantages of DAOs when I dive into it. The organization structure of DAO is naturally suited to the blockchain industry. Its flat organizational format currently fits exactly the needs of the blockchain industry. Of course these background of DAO is not the topic of today. But for me, the core appeal of DAO lies in two aspects: openness of the process and democracy of decision-making.
Why are these two points so important?
One of the core problems of traditional companies is the lack of transparency about the company. Even the financial reports of listed companies that are required to disclose information to the public are frequently falsified, not to mention those that don't meet the listing criteria. So in the past, the decision-making process in corporate governance was akin to a black box, and ultimately only a number of people, or one person, or even no one, was clear about all decisions or directions of the company. This black box would directly increases the cost of employee cooperation and depresses individual's motivation. A similar situation is particularly evident in large companies, where the top does not know the bottom and the bottom does not know the top, which maybe the most important source of the Lack of Diligence by Large Enterprises.
One of the great advantages of an open process is that everyone is able to submit proposals and make them visible to the community. If the proposal is reasonable, it can be supported by the community, being implemented and rewarded accordingly. This can certainly motivate the community.
Democracy in decision-making is the second consideration. I am not superstitious about the advantages of democracy, but when dealing with proposals from the community, democratic voting may avoid the creation of another black box. Obviously, a democratic approach cannot completely avoid the situation where the whales have too much influence (there is no mechanism that can achieve a complete equality), but at least the views of all (or most) token holders are represented and the whole process is open.
At present we have a number of voting tools available to reflect the choices of the holders and to avoid a situation where the views of the majority of retail investors in listed companies are ignored.
What is the problem with DAO?
In the operation of many DAO institutions, we can see very good proposals and a relatively smooth voting process. However, the result of these proposals is often that they are not well-executed, and it feels a bit like a bull into the sea. The reason for this is that the regulation of DAO is not strong enough to be conducted by everyone.
Human nature is complex. Inertia is deeply rooted in human nature and there is no need to deny it. Without proper institutional constraints, human inertia cannot be effectively regulated. But even though many DAOs have rules and regulations in place, if there is no one to execute these rules and regulations, the rules are just a piece of paper. So to solve the problem of DAO's enforcement, a strong executive team should be organized. This is something that needs to be learned from the traditional corporations. The main responsibility of the executive team, apart from ensuring the normal operation of the RPD and external cooperation, is to implement the approved proposals. The decisions of the DAO are implemented in a relatively efficient manner.
To sum up, I think that a more appropriate DAO system should be designed based on the following principles: open process, democratic decision-making, and efficient execution.
Based on the above principles, I have designed RPD's DAO organization as follows. In the overall structure, RPD will be divided into InvestDAO, GovernDAO and ExecuteDAO.
The main responsibility of the InvestDAO is to decide whether to work with a Metaverse project in an open, transparent and professional manner, in the form of investment, community support and player participation.
The InvestDAO will include people with extensive gaming experience within the guild, team captains, members of the research department, core members of the guild at executive level, as well as representatives of the community and other professional advisors.
The Guild's game research department will also be set up in the Investment DAO, with research including but not limited to industry trends, game model analysis, game strategy, etc.
Governance DAO is set to process proposal-related operations and is based on two principles:
1/ Everyone can submit proposals.
2/ Token and NFT holders are allowed to vote. Some proposals need to receive a certain amount of support, and some major proposals require more than 50% of the total votes to pass. If there are too many proposals in the future, then we will set up a proposal review committee to conduct the initial review and filter out the proposals that are relatively suitable to go to the voting process.
The overall principles of the Executive DAO are efficient execution, open process and close relationship with the community; at the same time, we will do our best to achieve the fission of the game teams and provide appropriate resources and services for the fission of the game teams.
The ExecutiveDAO will have appropriate departments, including financing, marketing, community, game teams, technology, and international development departments.
The above system seems complex, but in practice it does not create the problem of excessive collaboration because it combines the open democracy of DAOs and the efficient implementation of corporatism. Meanwhile we have to employ a number of coordinator roles to reduce the frictional costs.
There is no perfect thing in the world, and there is no perfect DAO at this stage. Only through practice will we be able to find the right direction to build the RPD into an open, democratic and efficient DAO.