Funding
  • About
  • Process
    • Funding process
      • Process information
      • Process rate of change
      • Process rankings of importance
      • Delegating process decisions
      • Process complexity
    • Funding process differences
  • Approaches
    • Token funding vs network funding
      • Circular economy ideas
      • Web2 protocols & software library examples
      • Ecosystem funding factors for consideration
      • Token funding
      • Network funding
      • Funding the network, protocol and application layers
    • Contribution approaches
      • Contribution factors for consideration
      • Fully combined submission
      • Idea & contributor combined submissions
      • Independent submissions
      • Funding process data handling
    • Decision approaches
      • Decision factors for consideration
      • Fully combined decision
      • Idea & contributor combined decision
      • Independent decisions
      • Passive idea selection
      • Delegated idea selection
      • Contributor vs voter idea selection
    • Incentive approaches
      • Unsuitable incentive approaches
      • Incentive factors for consideration
      • Priority milestone incentives
      • Priority time incentives
      • Idea milestone incentives
      • Idea time incentives
      • Contributor time incentives
      • Idea cost approaches
        • Idea cost factors for consideration
        • Costs attached to contributors
        • Costs attached to ideas
        • Independent idea costs process
      • Proposal submission incentives
      • Maintenance of information incentives
    • Contribution verification approaches
      • Contribution verification factors for consideration
      • Task milestone based contribution logs
      • Project time based contribution logs
      • Individual time based contribution logs
    • Impact measurement approaches
      • Ecosystem areas for impact measurement
      • Contributors areas for impact measurement
      • Impact measuring factors for consideration
      • Priority impact measurement
      • Idea impact measurement
      • Contributor impact measurement
  • Knowledge
    • Knowledge process
  • Priorities
    • Priority process
  • Ideas
    • Idea process
    • Idea ownership approaches
      • Idea ownership factors for consideration
      • Owned ideas with fixed leadership
      • Owned ideas with distributed decisions
      • Shared ideas with elected leadership
      • Shared ideas with emergent leadership
    • Idea execution considerations
      • Idea examples
  • Contributors
    • Contributor process
    • Self sovereign identity opportunities
  • Contributions
    • Contribution verification
      • Current landscape
      • Recording & measuring contribution efforts
      • Individual monthly contribution logs
  • Outcome influence
    • Voter preferences & opinions
    • Voter outcome influence
  • Incentives
    • Proposal submission incentive approaches
    • Contribution incentive approaches
  • Impact
    • Creating impactful outcomes
  • 🔗Links
    • Treasuries
    • Income
    • Governance
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. Ideas
  2. Idea ownership approaches

Shared ideas with emergent leadership

PreviousShared ideas with elected leadershipNextIdea execution considerations

Last updated 10 months ago

Overview

Shared ideas with emergent leadership occur when the community has shared ownership of any of the ideas being suggested by members of that community and any leadership for those ideas is an emergent outcome that happens naturally rather than through election and that could change at any time.

Very high clarity of vision complexity (Score - 1)

No elected leadership means the community would need to decide the direction of any idea. This means the maximum number of participants could be involved in setting direction which could result in a very high complexity to reach alignment towards a shared vision. Having no official leadership could be challenging in situations where the idea complexity is high.

Very high governance decision complexity (Score - 1)

Complexity would be at its highest for decision making as the entire community would be able to participate in the decisions being made about the execution of the idea. This is effective for ensuring decisions are more representative but also comes with the cost of higher complexity in making those decisions. A large number of community members would now need to be well informed to make good decisions on how an idea should be executed and operated.

Very high change of leadership flexibility (Score - 5)

Leadership is not elected under this shared ideas ownership approach, decisions would be governed by the community, contributors may lead some of these efforts to help guide the execution but they would not be elected to be any form of authority over decisions.

Very high contributor participation flexibility (Score - 5)

A shared idea with emergent leadership would mean that any contributor could participate in supporting the execution of that idea. Contributors who are doing any sizable amount of work could be elected and compensated through the treasury. No small group of individuals or leadership would prevent anyone from being able to contribute towards an idea.

Very low openness of execution outcomes risks (Score - 5)

A shared idea is owned by the community meaning all contribution outcomes would be made public and freely available. This means all software, processes and insights should be open sourced and freely available. Any contribution outcomes are available for anyone in the community to iterate and experiment on themselves.

Total score = 17 / 25