Methodology for structuring & rewarding contributions


The Nation3 DAO is interested in having many engaged and active contributors that are able to efficiently and effectively carry out work to bring us closer to our collective goal: a thriving cloud nation providing services to its citizens.

Instead of set working hours, HR departments, and salary-based compensation, the open nature of DAOs allows for compartmentalisation of tasks, transparency over renumeration, and assurance that the treasury budget is well spent.

In the case of Nation3, this also allows us to bootstrap an internal economy - one of the core attributes of a nation state. An ability to meaningfully contribute to a growing economy while earning income will inevitably attract more talented individuals and become one of the driving forces for joining.


When building a decentralised nation, it only makes sense to use tools that fit the purpose.

Therefore, I’d like to propose a compartmentalised, task-based model for structuring the DAO’s activities and paying out compensation to contributors.



All activity of the DAO would be compartmentalised into Guilds. This makes it neat, focused and manageable - ultimately ensuring that things get done.

I propose to start with the below six guilds, but more can be created by any Citizen at any point in time, if there’s an interest:

  • Community Guild
  • Product Guild
  • Scouts Guild
  • Brand & Design Guild
  • Growth Guild
  • Meta Guild, responsible for the overall running of the organisation, discussion and creation of new guilds, the improvement and restructuring (where needed) of the org-wide processes, and, importantly, the coordination of Guilds between each other.

Each guild would have its own:

  • Coordinator
  • Quarterly roadmap
  • Quarterly budget, with flexibility to review and adjust monthly
  • Monthly progress reports

Guild membership should be fluid, and any Nation3 Citizen should be able to join and exit guilds as they like.

Budget planning & incentives

Each quarter, a budget would be put forward by each guild, together with their roadmap. This budget and roadmap would then need to be approved by the DAO in the standard governance process.

Guilds should keep that budget in mind when determining compensation for tasks: it’s in their interest to ensure fair compensation so that the guild overall can perform well against the roadmap. If the entire roadmap is completed, all participating guild members would receive a bonus worth 100% of that guild’s quarterly contributor compensation budget, allocated pro rata to member contributions. For clarity purposes, this means base compensation as determined by budget, plus bonus.

The bonus only unlocks if more than 90% of the guild’s roadmap has been completed. After the first 90% have been completed, the bonus is allocated linearly, to ensure the final push for roadmap completion:

90% of roadmap = 50% bonus 
95% of roadmap = 75% bonus 
100% of roadmap = 100% bonus

While this might seem like a large amount to be allocated as bonus, I strongly believe that overachievers should be heavily compensated, and it’s paramount for the DAO to attract overachievers if we are to achieve the ambitious goals we’ve set out.

Task Management

Each Guild would manage their own Dework board, creating tasks based on their quarterly roadmap. The Guild would assign compensation for each task, according to the total budget they have approved. It is in their interest to compensate those fairly, as the entire Guild is incentivised to complete the entire roadmap to unlock their bonus.

Any Citizen can pick up these tasks, as citizens are free to move around Guilds to work on tasks they see as a fit.

At the end of each month, the Guild coordinator would present a report of the Guild’s progress against the roadmap. The community can then pass a vote to determine whether the roadmap is indeed fulfilled, and unlock the bonus.

Exceptions: roles that require (some level of) permanency

There might be exceptions for roles that require permanency, either for technical or management efficiency reasons, such as:

  • Rewards Committee: as multisig holders, it is complex to replace individuals, and cannot feasibly be task-based)
  • Guild Coordinators: having a specific individual elected as Guild Coordinator for a period of time helps cohesiveness of the guild. They would be able to oversee task completion towards defined goals while interacting with individual members on a consistent basis. Having a task-based Coordinator would likely result in chaotic dynamics within guilds.
  • Community Coordinators: exactly the same as above, it helps achieve coherency in the community to have specific individuals in the role for a longer period of time.
  • Treasury Committee: as a high-risk, high-responsibility role, this required expert and thoroughly vetted individuals that have a proven reputation as ‘top of the game’ in the Web3 ecosystem when it comes to asset management. This Committee would also require a high degree of accountability for treasury performance. Finally, due to the nature of Web3 markets, a longer time period might be required to demonstrate performance of a given strategy. Hence, the role cannot be task-based.


This feels like the most suitable format of work for an organisation that scaled to such large numbers within the first few days of existence. This compartmentalisation of tasks allows inclusivity, transparency, and efficiency in a decentralised organisation, while allowing the creation for an internal economy that’s so critical for a cloud nation.

This model also helps us avoid problems such as ‘Why do they get a higher salary than me, I think I work just as hard’, ‘When will I get a raise?’ “how can I be a core contributor”, and other issues associated with centralised HR.


I think the investment and research guild is missing here, and I am not suitable for other guilds.


i think we could use OKR to measure the guild member
's output,to linked reward with a college student major in HRM,i think i can help this thing out.

mayby we need hrbp in each guild to help them complete the target setting.

HR is notorious! Don’t introduce it!

its not a traditional hr , just a normal member in the guild

@orangekkd Perhaps research can go under the Scouts Guild? @anastasiya, was that your thinking as well?

1 Like

Support this proposal, so how to join?

1 Like

Exactly, Scouts guild (we can totally rename if you guys prefer) was meant to be research of projects, services and tools that benefit the cloud nation ecosystem!


First of all, I think building Nation3 infrastructure and Nation3 concept evangelists, these two aspects are more important

Secondly, we need to have a reward and punishment mechanism for OG contributors, a scoring system? Or in other ways, I think the scoring system is a basic score + incentive points. If the evaluation is relatively low for three consecutive months (or other time periods), I think we can encourage him to try other groups and select people who are suitable for this position.

@orangekkd Did you have a proposal for a research guild?

Aha,I think Scouts guildI you’re talking about and the research guild orangekkd’s talking about might be a thing.We all understand the same meaning but use different words to express it :blush:

1 Like

Nice framework! Especially the observability part and clearing up HR black zones.

Curious about the next steps/roadmaps to successfully implement this.