Pivoting a DAO

How to make a decentralized organization that can change course nimbly.

Maybe a fever dream, but I’m thinking about an approach for DAOs that can pivot without sacrificing decentralization.

A few years ago, we were toying with the notion of what I was calling “two factor decision-making.” The core of the concept was this:

“They who know the most should decide what’s best, but they who listen best should decide who knows the most.”

Hence, we don’t vote for a decision. We don’t vote for a decision-maker. We vote to select who will decide on which one or two other people decide.

We vote for the best listener in the context of the specific timeframe and subject around a specific matter, understanding that the best listener in one context may be the person who knows the most — and is at that moment focused on their own thinking to articulate their ideas — in another.

Asking a voter to decide what’s best on any given topic means they will decide from a position of ignorance, most of the time. Asking a voter to select a representative to decide for them puts them in the same position of ignorance, compounded by human tendencies toward tribalism and notions of popularity. But asking a voter simply and repeatedly to become good at deciding who is the best listener on any given matter, and giving them the single choice of who (other than themself) will make the final decision…that is something that humans can do, and over time perhaps do well within a culture that supports the notion.

This has been on my mind a lot, thinking about how to turn innovation teams into coherent operations that more seamlessly transcend company boundaries — A DAO that can handle the constant change involved in early stage innovation while giving all participants an interest in the DAO’s outcomes.