OpCo – A DAO-adjacent Entity for Strategy Execution

General Thoughts

Our team is generally pleased with the overall design of Opco. While we recognize that it introduces some centralization risk for the DAO, we believe the resulting improvements in execution and efficiency will bring benefits that outweigh the risk. We’re also glad to see that the model preserves a decentralized, bottoms-up approach to working group creation, continuing to empower individuals.

There are, however, several important areas that need further clarification. For instance, the legal entity structure, as raised by @Immutablelawyer and @Pablo, and clearer detail around all checks and balances. We’re also interested in understanding why there are no term limits for the OAT, as raised by @DisruptionJoe.

Concerns around Hiring

Most importantly, we would like more insight into Opco’s recruitment strategy, particularly regarding the selection of the two-person executive team (Chief of Coins and Chief Chaos Coordinator) and the 10 internal employees. Given the centralization risks posed by Opco, it’s essential that the executive team not only has strong operational expertise but is also well-versed in DAOs. Since this skill set is unique, we’re curious about the specific approach to recruiting such candidates.

Furthermore, what happens if the DAO cannot secure the ideal candidates? Specifically, for the executive roles, will the Opco’s initiation be delayed, or will the OAT step in to manage executive responsibilities temporarily if these positions are unfilled?

Regarding the 10 employees mentioned in the sample budget, we’re wondering if this setup resembles a “bench” model, similar to consulting firms, where the DAO would have access to resources on demand for various initiatives. If that’s the case, we’re concerned about potential underutilization, a common challenge in consulting and agency models, where resources are hired without clear expectations around the scope or duration of their projects.

Additional Questions

Will the Chief of Chaos oversee existing working groups that fall under the Opco’s mandate (Ecosystem Support & Financial Management). What exactly will their role be? Will it be to improve processes or something else?

Additionally, what checks and balances, if any, will be created for the Chief of Coins and Chief Chaos Coordinator? For example, will the DAO be able to veto initiatives proposed by these individuals?

Lastly, the proposal states, “The OpCo is a legal entity that delegates and key stakeholders can leverage to achieve DAO-defined goals.” Is it correct to assume that these goals have not been started yet but will be worked on in phase 1, as per the the mission, vision, and purpose post?

1 Like