DAOhaus Product Vision & Strategy -- On-going Meeting Notes

--- tags: magesmiths --- # DAOhaus Product Vision & Strategy -- On-going Meeting Notes ## June 24th, 2022 - How do we align our short, medium, and long term goals? - Jord: We don't have the luxury of long term goals, maybe vision at minimum - We should plan the time more closely the time we know we do have - Dekan: Long term goals should be low fidelity and doesn't need to be super specific - Could just be a loose direction - Should this be a quarterly exercise to reflect on these goals, extend new goals? - Felipe joined to run a workshop improvisationally - Reminds him of a similar situation at a company with diminishing runway - Where should we be allocating resources to increase the runway - Felipe presents war pigs idea, will make people angry - Action takes precedent over consent and context - sHAUS becomes the war pigs breakfast - Jord: Doesn't like the flip-flopping of approaches (survival vs. ship at all costs) - Long term goal - Revive as public good? - Dekan: Let's delegate the decision on how to restructure to 3 people - Can gnosis bail us out? ## May 27th, 2022 Discussion on [Sustainability Report](https://hackmd.io/WnF1BFjhQYu6HegWkvgiwA) ## May 4, 2022 [Platform Strategy Worksession #1](https://hackmd.io/X7wLHBYmRauoVEFF84T0yQ) ## April 29, 2022 ### Agenda #### What is this meeting about? - What problems have we identified that we are attempting to solve? - What are our goals? - Describe the context (ecosystem) in which DAOhaus exists - Identify opportunities - Identify who we are delivering value to? What are their problems? How are we solving those problems? - Establish (or reaffirm) our collective vision - Establish our collective strategy - Framework for prioritizing workstreams and justification of why - Hold projects/workstreams accountable to our collective strategy - Establish a role that is accountable to our strategy - maybe fractal roles down the project/workstream tree - What are the desired outputs/artifacts? Ideas - identify assumptions about user base or direction ==> research questions - visualizations of opportunities - documentation of strategic decisions and decisions based on strategy - [DAOhaus conceptual architecture diagram](https://www.figma.com/file/1RCw6028L7AVb7usE0N3vs/MetaHaus?node-id=0%3A1) - roadmap - wishlist / idea backlog - how to harness the power of individual creative energy #### Process & role definition - Meeting cadence - to start: initial workshop or sprint? - output of the sprint is a forum for others who didn't participate to weigh in - ongoing: - 60 minute meeting - fortnightly cadence - Who needs to participate? - initial workshop: - ongoing: - Who can participate? - Anybody in Warcamp - Should we invite anybody else (eg CCO contributors)? - Product/Platform Strategy -- is this a role? ### Notes #### Problems we are attempting to solve - There has been **some disconnect between design and devs** (Magesmiths) - Who the target segment is. The customers we are solving for. - What we are building and why. - Best way to spend time, focus attention. - Allowing for this *divergence is ciritical, but requires clear strategy.* - Similar divergence with Rangers circle: what we are communicating and why, the narrative we can convey to the larger audience. - Response to a provocation: "DAOs cannot build cohesive, focused products."" - Design by committee is not great for some use cases, for example: day-to-day decisions. Better for high-level decisions and editing process. When do we delegate? - Designers identify certain modalities, unsure how to measure against a common understanding of the user/use case. - Rowing in multiple direction simultaneously inhibits collective progress. How do we row in the same direction? Arriving at solutions together = more meaningful. - Improving documentation, the dev experience, will compliment the SDK work and build interest in the community. - Narrowing focus allows us to attend to all the opportunities. - A million ideas will arise. We require a consensus mechanism for deciding the most important path: **a rubric for collective decision making.** - Identifying **clear north stars** for collective intention. - We are not as clear on DAOhaus' place in the dynamically evolving ecosystem. This inhibits making clear decisions about what to prioritize. *This is risky is we don't consider the broader context* for what makes sense in the long-term, for how DH can make the most impact in relation to everything else happening around us. - V3 is going to look very different. How to maintain the long-term impact while maintaining previous product releases? How to mature as an org to handle this balance? #### Goals/Objectives - Concise, clear **product design strategy**. - Figuring out what the vision is, so that the strategies will support this vision. - Can be different per product. - Need a meta strategy, plus individual strategies. - Design = more than visual/aesthetic. Accounts for all the elements of the DAO - code, documentation, etc - combining into one cohesive field/focus. - How do we decide what products we should be designing? Alongside: How do we design them? - Continue **identifying opportunities** in a composable way in relation to the products we are building. - Identifying our customers: - Who are we delivering value to? - What are their problems? - Why are we priotizing the solutions we are pursuing? - **Creative accountibility**: someone that has their finger on the pulse, understands the larger idea and can maintain the north star direction for the whole org - A committee: provides orientation that filters feedback, proposes clear decisions as a group - An individual/role: handles the day-to-day micro decisions on local components - Documentation that facilitates understanding across these scales - We should maintain awareness of the power distribution to a single role in this position. Too much decision making authority might cause tension/friction down the line. - Consider representatives of individual strategies, maintain alignment or resurfacing breakdown in alignment to the group/committee venue for wider discussion. - Should have a policy for pulling an individual off of this role to allow multiple perspectives - There are pros to having a single person dedicated to the larger DAO/product design visions: powerful single pointed focus. - Concerning consensus/dissensus of overall design vision: What do we do if we disagree? How to avoid breakdown/bottleneck? - Continue to contemplate the thickness/narrowness of the strategy to accomodate adapation - Alternatively, allow for a multiplicity of perspectives in the strategy, to avoid mutual exclusion. - Or we could always **fork Warcamp**: if an individual/group emerges with radically different ethics, they are encouraged to fork. - Let's maintain confidence that we will be able to *articulate a product design strategy/conceptualization of DAOhaus at the platform/infrastructural level that allows for a variety of interpretations of what our products are and who they are for that avoids forking the underlying infrastructure.* Maybe even create a foundation for future ideation to build upon this concrete opinionation. #### Outputs/Artifacts - Increasing the fidelity of [Ven's *MetaHaus* diagram](https://daohaus.mirror.xyz/9ZGrKjwJT8uzF3p7MiYNaSpXgGV2A2I83y_6R-ry3V8): how to build the monolithic product into smaller modules - Towards a more efficient roadmap - Create a repo to catch ideas, to form a backlog, capture so they don't get lost. - How to harness the power of individual creative energy. - Deliberated between the head of a project and the contributors.