Facilitation Framework & Questions for X1 Treasury Management OIP

The following is the 1-pager referred to in Action #4 from the “OIP - X1 Treasury Management”:

Facilitation Framework

  • GEFNSETT = “good enough for now, safe enough to try”
  • Questions are meant as prompts, not as suggestions
  • There are more questions here than will be useful, on purpose.
  • Going one section at a time (ie starting with Strategic):
    • By default, all questions should be “left for later”. Which questions do you or other pod members object to leaving for X2?
      • Criteria: Can we come up with GEFNSETT decisions around financial transfers to individuals for X1, without discussing this question?
    • Discuss the questions with an objection.
      • Objective is NOT to answer the questions thoroughly. Please object or flag when when discussion seems like it may be going in that direction.
      • Objective IS to either:
        • resolve the objection to “waiting until later”, in order to move on, OR
        • come up with a “good enough for now, safe enough to try” answer, ie what’s the simplest solution that would allow us to move on?
    • When all questions in a section have been answered, summarize the results, and give a chance for objections. When there are none, move on.
      • Note that answers to subsequent questions may spark ideas about adjustments to earlier questions. Use the consent/objection framework to manage changes. Don’t spend time up front trying to come up with the ideal order to discuss the questions, it’s impossible to get right a priori.
  • Remember to assign a note taker, and take good notes. These notes will be revisited later in X1.

Questions To Consider:

A. Strategic

  1. How would we know at the end of X1, that we had made good decisions around “financial transfers to individuals”?
    • keeping people around, incentivizing particular behavior, finding ways to generate revenue, long-term or short-term focus, moving fast & breaking things, going slow and carefully building, etc
  2. What kinds of individual and group behavior do we want to incentivize?
    • collaboration, individual, collectivism, relationship-building, community building, loyalty, contributions to discussions/discord/discourse, etc
  3. Who is this being designed for?
    • people doing this as a hobby, side-hustle, or intention for more?
    • people with significant financial resources, anyone, or some other group?
  4. What is the mental model we want to use for financial transfers to individuals, for now?
    • Mental models indicate intent. What is our intention with the available funds for X1?
    • compensation? stipends? gifts? rewards? grants? enablement? empowerment? inclusion? thanks?

B. Tactical

  • Is it person-based, market-based, internally augmented or something else?
    • what the person needs, what the market would pay, internal level (ie market minus 20%, or small stipend?)
  • Where is it on a spectrum of Role-based to employment-based?
    • atomizing, or x-fixed-amount?
  • Is it contingent, guaranteed, or partially both?
    • automatic or based on something?
  • Is it localized, country-based, or global?
    • ie the rate(s) you set
  • Is it self-set, team-set, leader-set, or committee-set?
    • ie who decides what it is (for that project, season, person, proposal, etc)?
    • Note: we’ve seen examples of “self-set” by including compensation in proposals
  • Is it negotiable or non-negotiable?
    • let bias and identity creep in? fixed offers, and people take it or leave it?
    • applicable only when not “self-set”
  • Is it secret or transparent?
    • If visible, who is it visible to?
    • How much effort do we put into making it clear/transparent? (ie on-chain is technically transparent, but that may not be connected to a person. Do we create a document/place for an X1 compensation summary?)
  • Is it singular, varied, tiered and/or levelled?
    • ie pm level 1, pm level 2?
    • anyone can pay what they want on that project?
  • Is it annually adjusted, market adjusted, results adjusted, or something else?
    • ie adjusted over time according to different factors?
  • Are there increases or not, over time?
    • ie from season to season, or another time frame?
  • Is it tenure or experience driven or not? (or only skills and reputation)
    • recognition for time as an orcanaut?
    • recognition for time pre-X1?
  • Is it role-based?
    • ie is there compensation for pod-leads, facilitators, admins, secretaries?
      • If yes, what else do we need to know to be GEFNSETT?
  • The review of it is connected to performance/feedback, or separate?
    • what (if any) review of compensation would be helpful for this pod? the main pod?

C. Practical

  • What is the simplest way for the money to do what we want?
  • What mechanisms do we know of that might be helpful?
    • don’t forget to consider manual, it’s the simplest!
  • What is the mechanism we want to use to accomplish the above?
    • consider using a matrix rating the alternatives across a short list of criteria

Note: Credit to Aaron Dignan & Rodney Evans from the Ready, and Chase Chapman. Many of the above questions are based on ideas shared in Episode 31 of Chase’s Podcast: “On The Other Side”.

1 Like