Procurement

Procurement

Introduction to subDAO Procurement

Prior to entering into the weeds of the policies and procedures a subDAO ought to follow when procuring services, goods or general work for its operations, it’s pivotal that we delineate what we mean by Procurement, specifically in the context of SubDAOs (present, and future) within the dYdX Ecosystem. 

In general, Procurement refers to the process of acquiring goods, services, or works from external sources. It encompasses all stages of a procurement process from the identification of needs, the acquisition process, to the final delivery and contract management. In traditional government procurement, the process would consist of a tendering process however, albeit this methodology being potentially utilised for some of the subDAO’s activities, this methodology is not one that’s normally used within the context of dYdX subDAO procurement due to the needs that need to be satisfied.

In the context of subDAOs, procurement involves selecting service providers and partners who can deliver services or products that support the subDAO's objectives and add value to the underlying dYdX community who would have entrusted the corresponding SubDAO with responsible management of fund expenditure.

Now that we’ve defined Procurement at a conceptual level, hereunder, we will delineate some high-level principles one ought to keep in mind when either running a Procurement Framework (with an ancillary tendering process) or even administering/facilitating an in-house Procurement process for good, services or work in general. These guidelines and standards are designed to ensure that procurement activities are conducted in a transparent, efficient, and ethical manner with the end goal being that of achieving a cost-effective and risk-mitigated result. 

Transparency and Accountability: By following a clear set of rules and guidelines, subDAOs can ensure that all procurement activities are open to scrutiny and that decisions are made objectively. This builds trust within the community and ensures that community funds are used responsibly.

Efficiency and Effectiveness: A well-defined procurement framework (even one to be used for internal purposes) helps streamline the process of acquiring goods and services, reducing the time and resources required to effectively meet the need as identified by the subDAO. This ensures that the subDAO can quickly and effectively meet its needs while obtaining the best possible value.

Adequate Due Diligence: Careful selection and vetting of service providers minimises the risk of selecting an unreliable or incapable partner. 

Needs Assessment

Identification and Prioritization

  1. Identify Needs: The need for a service or product typically arises from the subDAO's mandate. Needs should be clearly defined before identifying potential service providers or partners.
  2. Analyse Current Situation: Evaluate existing resources and identify gaps or areas for improvement.
  3. Define the Scope of the Need: Specify the functionalities, quality standards, and other relevant attributes that the subDAO needs to effectively satisfy the need identified in [1].
  4. Prioritise Needs: Assess the urgency and importance of each need based on strategic value and cost-benefit analysis. A subDAO may, at any one time, have multiple needs that are identified. Proper prioritisation of these needs will naturally lead to increased efficiency in light of the respective mandate and any applicable timelines emanating therefrom. 

Scope of Work

A detailed Scope of Work should be the starting point for any procurement process, strategy or framework. It defines the need to be satisfied as delineated in the needs assessment, provides context, identifies responsible individuals within the subDAO to facilitate the process, and offers a rough budget estimate that would ideally be in full alignment with the subDAOs financial plans and any applicable segregated budgets allocated for the respective needs identified. This document is crucial for engaging potential service providers.

Identifying Possible Partners

Potential service providers can be identified through various channels, including:

  • Recommendations: From the community, professional networks, or forums.
  • Conferences: Useful for networking and exploring new solutions.
  • Research: Essential for vetting recommended service providers or exploring new options.

No avenue should be overlooked, and thorough research is necessary to ensure service providers can deliver on their promises. Ideally, when running a non-tender-based procurement framework, the subDAO personnel responsible for satisfying the need identified should correspond with the identified service providers/partners so as to assess their viability and track record in relation to the need to be satisfied. For the sake of a thorough process and for one to reach an objective conclusion on the service provider/partner to be selected, a scoring mechanism could be implemented. 

Due Diligence

Due diligence is essential to ensure the subDAO is comfortable with a chosen service provider. The extent of this process depends on the project's importance and potential risks. Key due diligence activities include:

  1. Review Other Projects: Assess the service provider's experience in similar projects or within the ecosystem.
  2. First-Hand Experience: Seek direct feedback from those who have previously worked with the service provider.
  3. Online Research: Look for reviews or other information online.
  4. Gut Feeling: While subjective, the confidence in a service provider's capability should not be dismissed.

Three-Quote system

In most cases, the subDAO would have short-listed multiple service providers that are capable of meeting its needs. Hence, the additional hurdle in this regard is adopting a methodology that aims at reaching the decision on the most optimal service provider to solicit the need from.

Where the subDAO finds that there are multiple service providers that are capable of meeting its needs in light of the methodology adopted throughout the procurement process, the Three-Quote System could be employed to ensure competitive pricing and value for money. The Three-Quote System ensures that you have a minimum of three comparable proposals from these shortlisted service providers to enable the subDAO to compare and contrast the value-proposition of each.

This procedure involves soliciting quotes from the corresponding multiple service providers, comparing their offerings, and selecting the most suitable provider based on a range of criteria including cost, quality, and capability. The steps involved in this procedure are outlined below:

  • Quote/Proposal Solicitation: Requesting a quote/proposal from the short-listed service providers so as to collect the data necessary to analyse the offering.
  • Price Comparison: Analyzing the cost-effectiveness of each quote, including any additional costs or discounts that may be provided.
  • Quality and Capability Assessment: Reviewing the proposed methodologies, experience, and past performance (this data would have been collected in the Due Diligence phase of the process).

Interviews and Clarifications:

  • If necessary, the procurement team may conduct interviews or seek clarifications from the service providers to better understand their proposals and capabilities.

Final Selection:

  • Based on the comparative analysis, the subDAO selects the service provider that offers the best value for money. This decision takes into account not only the price but also the quality, reliability, and overall suitability of the provider.
  • The chosen provider is then notified and contract negotiations commence.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

dYdX subDAOs may be underpinned by a legal structure as delineated in the ‘Legal’ section of the DAO Playbook. In this regard, there are certain legal parameters one must abide to when choosing a service provider they have affiliations and/or pre-existing contractual agreements with. 

In this regard, when a conflict of interest arises in relation to a service provider to be chosen, this should always be disclosed to the subDAO’s respective personnel namely, the Supervisor or Enforcer of the corresponding subDAO. The existence of a conflict of interest should not disqualify the service provider from providing services that satisfy the needs of the subDAO if, following the disclosure of a conflict of interest by a subDAO member, the corresponding service provider is still deemed to be the best solution in light of the methodology delineated in this Procurement section. 

In this regard, aside from the pre-existing legal obligation to disclose conflicts of interest as per the applicable law regulating the legal structure, it is always advisable for each respective subDAO to adopt their personnel-level conflict of interest policies and procedures so as to streamline the disclosure process. 

Contractual Considerations

Hereunder, we shall now delve into a non-exhaustive list of considerations one ought to take into account when, following the choice of service provider as per the process delineated throughout this section, the subDAO reaches the contract execution stage.

1. Exit Strategy and Transition Assistance

  • Termination Clauses: The Agreement should delineate clear conditions for contract termination, including voluntary termination by either party, breaches, or other specific events that would lead to the termination of the Agreement. Dependent on the structure chosen by the subDAO, additional considerations would potentially need to be taken into account (such as termination upon the end of the mandate of the subDAO). 
  • Transitory Assistance: Depending on the service-type solicited from a service provider, following termination a transitory clause would ideally be inserted. This transitory provision would require the service provider to assist in transitioning services to a new provider or bringing them in-house. This could potentially encapsulate a myriad of different transitory actions, such as continued operational support until full hand-over, transferring of data to new servers and ensuring continued maintenance of infrastructure-related components (if applicable) until the new personnel / service provider is up and running.

2. Data Ownership and Portability

  • Data Ownership: In this regard, firstly, one ought to consult with the subDAO’s legal advisor to ensure that the proper data protection provisions are in place in light of the applicable data protection laws. Additionally, the agreement should clearly state that all data generated or used in the service belongs to the subDAO with the service provider having mere access on an as needed basis and when solely necessary for the provision of the service so procured as per the procurement process.

4. Performance Guarantees

  • Performance-Based: Dependent on the service solicited, the subDAO can insert certain quantitative and qualitative performance/quality metrics within the agreement. This could include, but is not limited to, uptime expected from the service to be offered (if it relates to infrastructure for example), response times exected from the service provider (especially important if the service provider is one of a stand-by nature), and support availability from the service provider’s side.
  • Penalties for Non-Compliance: The subDAO can also potentially opt to Include penalties or incentives based on performance against the agreement to ensure the provider's accountability. The adoption of such a clause is very dependent on the service to be offered. 

5. Intellectual Property (IP) Rights

  • IP Rights: Specify the ownership and usage rights of any IP developed during the engagement, ensuring that the client retains rights or has sufficient licenses to continue operations independently.

6. Contract Duration and Renewal Terms

  • Contract Length: Consider shorter contract durations with options for renewal rather than long-term commitments.
  • Renewal Terms: Define clear renewal terms, including price adjustments and review processes, to reassess the service provider relationship periodically.

8. Confidentiality and Security Measures

  • Confidentiality Clauses: Protect sensitive information with confidentiality provisions to ensure the safekeeping of sensitive data transitioned to the service provider. Also ensure that data-access granted to the service provider is only granted if it’s necessary to complete the scope of work agreed upon.
  • Security Measures: Ideally, a consideration should also be given to ensuring that the service provider has adequate internal safeguard in place to ensure the protection of any confidential data or information granted to the service provider. These measure could be contractual (adequate internal policies to bind the service provider’s personnel to the non-disclosure of confidential data) and technological (adequate systems in place to mitigate potential data breaches). 

9. Dispute Resolution

  • Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Define processes for resolving disputes, such as mediation or arbitration, to manage conflicts efficiently.
  • Jurisdiction & Choice of Law: Ensure that the agreement has an equitable choice of law & jurisdiction clause so as to streamline the dispute resolution process should it reach a stage where arbitration or judicial litigation is necessary. 

Disclaimer

This was substantially altered from the previous version, which was very bureaucratic and in our experience not feasible for a small team, such as ours (Ops subDAO) and we are of the opinion that subDAOs are smaller teams by default. Which is why we wanted to create guidelines that if followed achieve the same goals as the original Procurement Policy

1. Governance

subDAOs are mandate-oriented collectives which are wholly and entirely created and facilitated through the dYdX Governance Framework. As can be assessed from the Legal section, several entity-types are able to create a bridge between on-chain governance, and the legal enforceability of the respective proposals passed by the community through on-chain governance. In this section, we’ll be delving into the details of the dYdX Governance Framework.

2. Token-holder decision-making

In the dYdX ecosystem, DYDX token holders, through the dYdX Chain Governance Framework and its ancillary mechanics, hold the ultimate decision-making authority in relation to the establishment of subDAOs, their termination, and any modification during their term of establishment. To balance the need for efficient execution with the necessity of retaining decision-making power among token holders, the two existing subDAOs have established a governance structure that aims to create a bridge between on-chain governance decision-making and the legal enforcement of these decisions.

3. Bridging on-chain governance to the subDAO’s legal structure

dYdX Chain Governance is recognized as the highest authority in the legal documents governing the two subDAOs, specifically through:

  • Trust Deed for the Grants subDAO.
  • Constitution and Bylaws (Foundation Company) for the Ops subDAO.

This legal structure ensures that decisions made through on-chain proposals are legally binding for the subDAO entities and their representatives, extending the reach of dYdX Chain Governance beyond the blockchain. More specifically, the governing documentation specifically creates a bridge between on-chain governance and the corresponding entity by virtue of specifying the rights that DYDX tokenholders have in relation to the subDAO. These could include the appointment and removal of personnel, amendments to the governing documentation and/or mandate, and termination or further injection of funding to the subDAO. For more detailed information, refer to the Legal section. 

4. Appointed Community Representatives 

[Trustees & Enforcer / Directors & Supervisor]DYDX token holders, through on-chain governance, appoint Trustees and an Enforcer for the Grants subDAO (and the first iterations of the Ops subDAO), as well as Directors and a Supervisor for the Operations subDAO in its current iteration. These representatives are responsible for pursuing, or overseeing the pursuit of, the subDAOs' mandated goals within the provided budget. Their roles may involve direct action or the assembly and supervision of a team of core contributors tasked with achieving the subDAOs' objectives.

5. Rights & Responsibilities of the Community Representatives

In both legal entities (Trust and Foundation Company), DYDX token holders, through dYdX Chain Governance, retain some critical rights and responsibilities in relation to their formulation:

  • Defining the entity's purposes or objectives.
  • Appointing or removing Community Representatives.
  • Amending foundational documents (Trust Deed/Articles of Association).

These powers ensure that DYDX token holders, through dYdX Chain Governance, maintain ultimate control over the subDAOs and their strategic priorities, while delegating necessary execution authority to the Community Representatives and any core contributors that are onboarded for the purposes of satisfying and / or facilitate the subDAO’s mandate. This governance structure facilitates lean and agile operations within the subDAOs while providing mechanisms to hold both the subDAOs and their representatives accountable.

6. Internal Controls

Given the significant authority and funds entrusted to subDAOs by DYDX token holders, a robust set of internal controls are essential to ensure that both are applied as intended. These controls, heavily inspired by best practices in corporate governance and internal controls from traditional corporations, are tailored to the specific needs of the dYdX ecosystem, considering the subDAOs' size and operational nature.

Purpose of Internal Controls

The internal controls aim to ensure that subDAOs operate according to the dYdX Chain Community's intentions. It also prevents any individual from making unilateral decisions such as spending decisions, vendor selection, or invoice payment, without consulting other subDAO members. This significantly reduces the risk of malicious activity within the organisation.The recommended internal controls aim to regulate key strategic decisions, spending decisions, vendor selection, accounting, and invoicing. However, given the importance of lean and efficient operations, these controls would primarily apply to high-stakes decisions or transactions. The Community Representatives of the subDAO are responsible for defining the thresholds for these controls and holding subDAO members accountable.

Key Strategic Decisions

Although not directly tied to specific expenses, the strategy defined for a subDAO will dictate many needs and necessary expenditures. Therefore, it is essential that the overarching strategy of the subDAO be sanctioned by its Community Representatives.

Spending Decisions and Vendor Selection

Deciding to allocate funds for specific purposes and selecting third-party service providers are critical organisational decisions. It is vital that no single person is granted full authority over such decisions. For larger financial commitments, more than one individual should support the decision. For more detail, refer to the Procurement section.

Invoices, Accounting, and Payments

Best practices in international accounting and internal controls suggest that three different individuals should handle the following tasks:

  1. Checking an invoice.
  2. Booking the invoice.
  3. Initiating the payment.

While implementing this within a small team can be challenging, involving at least two individuals should suffice. By way of an example, the person using the service (e.g., an engineer for an AWS invoice, or legal counsel for external legal fees) can check the invoice. Additionally, subDAO accounting should be as publicly available as much possible, enabling the dYdX Chain Community to hold the subDAO accountable and track financial activities in near real-time. For more detail, refer to the Operations section. 

7. Seeking dYdX Chain Community Consent

Decisions going beyond the original mandate or for structural changes require DYDX token holder approval through the dYdX Chain governance framework. 

8. dYdX Chain Community Governance Process 

The detailed governance process is explained here. But in short the process for seeking dYdX Chain Community consent for a subDAO is made up of the following steps: 

  1. Forum Post

Informing the community about the subDAO’s plans and detailing reasoning and objective of the upcoming proposal.

  1. Discussion Period Iteration

The community feedback is considered and if applicable incorporated in the proposal.

  1. On-Chain Proposal Submission

After the discussion phase the proposal is published on the dYdX Chain, and voting commences. 

  1. Implementation

After completion of the voting phase the outcome of the vote is implemented.

9. Examples of Governance in Action

The timeline of the Ops subDAO website provides several examples of when and how dYdX Chain Community consent was sought:

  1. DOT 2.0 - Extending the mandate of the DOT;
  2. Amending the purposes of the Trust
  3. Confirming new Trustees; and

Transition to Cayman Foundation Company.

1. Mandate

The primary objective of the operational infrastructure underpinning a subDAO should be that of efficiently and transparently delivering on the mandate granted to it by the community and as ratified by the community through on-chain voting. Achieving this goal requires a robust operational setup that enables subject matter experts to realize their full potential and deliver optimal value for the dYdX Chain Community.

2. Operational Infrastructure

While mandated priorities and key activities will vary significantly among different subDAOs, each organization needs a strong operational core to pursue its corresponding mandate effectively. This section outlines key aspects of subDAO operations essential for creating an effective working environment for the subDAO team of core contributors. 

a. Legal & Regulatory

The regulatory landscape underpinning the dYdX Chain’s operation is characterised by significant legal and regulatory ambiguity. This creates a complex environment for subDAO operations, necessitating a proactive and strategic approach to manage legal and regulatory risks effectively. The legal team within a subDAO must adopt a multifaceted operational approach to ensure compliance and mitigate risks. In this regard, one can also refer to the Procurement section of this Playbook so as to assess the ideal manner in procuring the necessary personnel to target this area. 

Operational Approach to Legal and Regulatory Compliance

I. Continuous Monitoring of Legal Landscape

  • Jurisdictional Analysis: Preliminary and ongoing assessment should be a standard and not an opt-in methodology. subDAO participants should regularly analyze the legal and regulatory frameworks in various jurisdictions where the subDAO operates or offers its Client Interface to. This includes understanding local laws related to virtual assets, financial regulations, data protection laws, and consumer protection regulations. There is more to the dYdX Chain than its mere infrastructure. For example, Ensuring that the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy are reviewed on a quarterly basis aids in ensuring that these two pivotal Client Interface documents. 
  • Regulatory Updates: Tying in with the above, the subDAO should endeavour to ensure that it’s staying updated with potentially relevant regulatory changes, enforcement actions, and emerging legal precedents that could impact its operations. This can be achieved through the subDAO’s in-house legal counsel (if applicable), the subDAO’s Fractional General Counsel (if applicable), legal subscriptions, industry reports, and participation in relevant legal forums and associations.

II. Risk Assessment and Management

  • Risk Identification: Additionally, and also tied to [1], by staying abreast with regulatory updates, the subDAO will naturally be identifying potential legal and regulatory risks associated with the subDAO’s activities. The identification of risk is, naturally, a necessary step for the subDAO to then correspond with relevant legal counsel to assess the risk identified. 
  • Risk Assessment & Mitigation: For any risks identified as per the point above, the subDAO should have in-house strategies to assess and mitigate identified risks. This would ideally include liaising with third-party providers or in-house subject-matter experts to assess the risk and ensure adequate mitigation measures are adopted. 

III. Legal Documentation and Compliance

  • Contract Drafting and Review: Ensure that all contracts, including service agreements, grant agreements, any integration agreements and infrastructure-related agreements, are drafted and reviewed by the relevant legal counsel so as to mitigate legal risks. Contracts should clearly define the rights, obligations, and liabilities of all parties involved. For some details on what to look out for when drafting and negotiating contracts on behalf of the subDAO, make reference to the Procurement Section of this Playbook. 
  • Compliance Policies: Develop and implement comprehensive compliance policies and procedures. This could include policies on anti-money laundering (AML), data protection, and financial reporting.
  • Documentation: Maintain thorough and accurate documentation of all legal and regulatory compliance efforts. This includes records of compliance audits, regulatory filings, correspondence with regulatory authorities, and internal compliance checks. Always keep in mind that you need adequate business continuity should the subDAOs personnel change. 

IV. Regulatory Liaison and Advocacy

  • Regulatory Engagement: Establish and maintain proactive communication with relevant regulatory authorities. This includes responding to regulatory inquiries, participating in consultations, and seeking guidance on compliance matters.
  • Advocacy: Engage in advocacy efforts to shape regulatory developments in favour of the subDAO’s operations. This may involve participating in industry groups, contributing to policy discussions, and collaborating with other stakeholders to cumulatively have a positive influence on regulatory outcomes.

3. Finance, Accounting, and Internal Controls

subDAOs within the dYdX Ecosystem are funded through the dYdX Chain Community Treasury. The decision to fund a dYdX subDAO is naturally taken by ecosystem participants in a collective manner and thus, ensuring the responsible management of these funds is a paramount element to the subDAOs operations. The finance team is tasked with meticulously tracking the funds entrusted to the subDAO, creating a financial roadmap, maintaining precise records, and preparing regular public reports to be delivered to the dYdX Community at large. At every step, these actions aim to facilitate and achieve the principles of accountability and transparency. Aside from offering the Ecosystem the necessary information on the subDAOs expenditure and planning, these details also aid in providing the Supervisor/Enforcer of the corresponding subDAO the necessary information so as to ensure that funds are not only being safeguarded, but are being utilised in line with the purposes of the subDAO as ratified through governance. 

I. Public Accounting

The financial records of the subDAO should ideally be publicly accessible. For instance, the ledgers of the Ops subDAO can be found here:  DOT, DOS. Regular reports combined with these ledgers provide the necessary information and context for the broader DAO to oversee the subDAO’s finances effectively. These reports also serve as a historical track record of the subDAOs finances, and aid in planning for future mandates and terms. They also provide the DAO at large great insight on the costs associated with a subDAO’s particular mandate. 

II. Internal Controls

In addition to thorough accounting, the finance team must implement robust internal controls. These controls are designed to prevent any single individual from concentrating decision-making and spending power, thus mitigating the risk of fraud. Spending decisions, for example, must be approved by more than one person.

III. Accounting Service Providers 

It is advisable to engage an expert accounting firm to maintain financial records in line with industry standards. This ensures the broader DAO receives an expert and independent opinion on the SubDAO’s financial situation and records. There are multiple accounting firms operating within the industry that offer digital asset accounting and bookkeeping. In most cases, the underlying legal infrastructure of a subDAO has annual bookkeeping and accounting obligations; ensuring adequate procurement of professional service providers in this regard is a pivotal piece of the subDAO’s accounting infrastructure. 

IV. Audit

Engaging an audit firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of financial records, statements, and internal controls can subject the SubDAO’s financials to scrutiny comparable to that faced by publicly traded companies.

4. Documentation

A strong documentation culture is essential for enabling the SubDAO to share and transfer knowledge across verticals and personnel. Detailed documentation of all activities, processes, and resources is crucial, particularly for remote teams. Fostering this culture and providing the necessary tools for effective documentation and information retrieval is a core responsibility of SubDAO operations.

5. Tooling

Careful evaluation of tools is advised to avoid oversubscription. The operational process that a tool aims to improve should be thoroughly examined and optimized beforehand. Simply porting an inefficient process to a slightly faster tool is counterproductive. Optimizing the underlying process can unlock more potential and reveal additional requirements for tools, further enhancing the optimized process.

The following is a list of tools the currently operating subDAOs find useful:

1. Notion

Notion is an all-in-one workspace for note-taking, task management, and documentation, allowing teams to centralize and organize information. It enables real-time collaboration, making it ideal for maintaining a shared knowledge base and project management.

2. Slack

Slack is a communication platform that facilitates organized team collaboration through channels and direct messaging. It integrates with other tools, ensuring seamless communication and coordination across the SubDAO.

3. Google Workspace

Google Workspace provides essential productivity tools like Gmail, Docs, Sheets, and Drive, enabling efficient document creation, sharing, and collaboration. It’s widely used for managing email, file storage, and real-time collaboration on documents.

4. Trello

Trello is a visual project management tool that uses boards, lists, and cards to organize tasks and workflows. It’s particularly useful for managing projects in software development and tracking progress across teams.

5. Safe (Gnosis Safe)

Safe is an industry-standard multisignature wallet solution for securely managing digital assets on-chain. It ensures that multiple approvals are required for any transaction, enhancing security and transparency in fund management.

6. Tres.finance

Tres.finance is an on-chain accounting tool that provides real-time financial tracking and reporting for DAOs. It allows for transparent and automated accounting processes, making financial management more efficient and accountable.

7. Xero

Xero is an accounting software that helps manage invoicing, expenses, and financial reporting. It’s user-friendly and integrates well with other financial tools, making it suitable for maintaining accurate financial records and reports.

6. Key Hires

Relevant roles for the subDAOs vary naturally with their mandate and need to be defined on a case by case basis. But supporting roles covering administrative and legal topics are necessary regardless of the mandate. The following are two roles that in our experience are key for any new subDAO: 

Legal Counsel

Role: The Legal Counsel is responsible for overseeing all legal matters within the SubDAO. This includes contract drafting and review, compliance policy development, regulatory engagement, and legal risk management. The Legal Counsel is also responsible for liaising with third-party jurisdiction-specific legal firms to facilitate the subDAOs strategies. 

Usual Responsibilities:

  1. Draft, review, and negotiate contracts and agreements.
  2. Develop and implement policies and procedures.
  3. Monitor regulatory developments and advise the SubDAO on compliance strategies.
  4. Conduct legal risk assessments and develop risk mitigation strategies.
  5. Provide legal training and guidance to SubDAO members and contributors.

Operations Manager

The Operations Manager in a SubDAO plays a critical role in ensuring that the organisation runs smoothly and efficiently. As voiced by existing dYdX subDAO, the Operations role is the backbone of the subDAOs endeavours. As can be seen from the below, most of the details mentioned throughout this section are facilitated by the subDAO’s operations manager. 

Usual responsibilities:

  1. Process Development and Optimization

The Operations Manager designs, implements, and continuously improves the processes and workflows that enable the SubDAO to meet its mandate effectively. This includes optimizing project management, communication, and operational workflows to enhance productivity and efficiency.

  1. Tooling and Infrastructure Management

They are responsible for selecting, implementing, and managing the tools and technologies that support SubDAO operations. This involves evaluating and integrating software for communication, project management, accounting, and documentation to ensure all tools align with the team's needs and operational goals.

  1. Reporting and Transparency

The Operations Manager is tasked with compiling and delivering regular reports on the SubDAO’s activities, finances, and performance to the broader DAO community. They ensure that reporting is transparent, accurate, and timely, balancing the need for operational effectiveness with the requirement for community oversight.

  1. Team Support and Development

They play a crucial role in supporting the core contributors by providing the necessary tools, processes, and environment to enable them to perform their tasks effectively. This includes fostering a collaborative work culture, ensuring effective communication, and addressing any operational issues that arise.

This section was authored by Axis Advisory

DISCLAIMER: The information in this guide should not be construed as legal or tax advice for any particular facts or circumstances and is not meant to replace competent counsel. None of the opinions or positions provided below are intended to be treated as legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship. This analysis might not reflect all current updates to applicable laws or interpretive guidance. It is strongly advised for the reader to contact a competent attorney in their jurisdiction for any questions or concerns.

I. Cayman Islands Foundation Companies and Their Application to dYdX subDAOs

  • Overview of Cayman Islands Foundation Companies

The Cayman Islands Foundation Companies Law, 2017 provides a flexible and robust legal structure that combines features of both traditional companies and trusts. This legal framework is particularly suited to decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs), such as those in the dYdX ecosystem, where a formal organizational structure is essential for managing complex operations and ensuring legal enforceability.

A Foundation Company in the Cayman Islands is a corporate entity with distinct legal personality, but it does not have shareholders. Instead, it can be established to pursue specific objectives, which may or may not be for the benefit of persons or entities, and these objectives are set out in its constitutional documents. For dYdX subDAOs, this vehicle provides an optimal bridge between proposal that are ratified by DYDX token holders through the dYdX Chain governance framework, and the legal enforceability, facilitation and execution of that proposal through an underlying legal structure established for its purposes.

  • Key Components of a Cayman Islands Foundation Company

Constitutional Documents: The Foundation Company is governed by a memorandum and articles of association, which collectively form its constitution. These documents must outline the subDAO’s objects, governance structure, and provisions for the disposal of assets upon winding up. The constitution can also provide for the appointment of directors, and supervisors, and set out their respective duties and powers. As per the Governance section, the purposes of the Foundation Company, its directors and supervisors, are all elements that can be inserted in the corresponding governance proposal and adopted in the Foundation Company’s governing documentation. 

Legal Personality: A Foundation Company is a legal entity separate from its founders, members, and other participants. It can enter into contracts, hold assets, and sue or be sued in its own name.

Foundation Company Requirements:

  • Limited by Shares or Guarantee: A Foundation Company must be either limited by shares or by guarantee, with or without share capital.
  • Qualified Secretary: The Foundation Company must have a qualified person as its secretary, who ensures compliance with relevant laws, including anti-money laundering regulations.
  • Objects: The company must specify its objects, which may be for the benefit of specific persons or purposes, and these objects must be outlined in its memorandum.
  • No Distributions to Members: The memorandum must prohibit distributions of profits or assets to members, although members may receive remuneration or other benefits for services provided.

Supervisors and Directors:

  • Supervisors: Supervisors are individuals or entities who have rights and duties under the constitution to oversee the management of the Foundation Company. They can attend and vote at general meetings and are responsible for ensuring the company adheres to its objectives. 
  • Directors: The directors manage the day-to-day operations of the Foundation Company and are responsible for its governance, subject to any restrictions imposed by the constitution or bylaws.

Both of the aforementioned personnel can be voted on by DYDX token holders and subsequently appointed to these roles upon the passing of a governance proposal by DYDX token holders. 

Bylaws: The Foundation Company may adopt bylaws to regulate its internal management and governance. These bylaws do not form part of the constitution but are binding on the directors, supervisors, officers, and other persons with duties under the constitution.

Regulatory Compliance: The Foundation Company must comply with relevant Cayman Islands laws, including the Proceeds of Crime Law, the Terrorism Law, and the Money Laundering Regulations. The secretary plays a crucial role in ensuring this compliance.

  • Application to dYdX subDAOs

The dYdX DAO can utilize Cayman Islands Foundation Companies to establish and govern subDAOs, such as the dYdX Operations subDAO. This structure allows the DAO to delegate specific responsibilities to subDAOs while maintaining overall control through the on-chain dYdX Chain governance framework.

  1. Establishment and Governance: A dYdX subDAO can be established as a Foundation Company, with its constitutional documents reflecting the objectives set by the dYdX DAO. These documents would outline the roles and responsibilities of directors and supervisors, who are appointed through the DAO's governance process.
  1. Legal Enforceability: By incorporating a subDAO as a Foundation Company, the dYdX DAO ensures that decisions made through on-chain governance are legally binding and enforceable. This legal structure creates a bridge between the decentralized governance model of the DAO (and its ancillary on-chain governance mechanics) and the traditional legal system.
  1. Operational Flexibility: Foundation Companies provide the flexibility needed for subDAOs to manage complex operations, enter into legal agreements, and employ the necessary core contributors. The ability to have supervisors and directors who oversee different aspects of the subDAO’s operations ensures that the entity can function effectively while adhering to its objectives as mandated by the DAO. 
  1. Accountability and Transparency: The governance structure of a Foundation Company includes provisions for accountability, such as the requirement to maintain proper accounts and provide reports to interested persons. In the context of a subDAO, this ensures that the dYdX community can monitor the subDAO's activities and hold it accountable. In this regard, please refer to the Operations section for further details on what this entails, and how this obligation is satisfied. 
  1. Risk Management: While establishing a Foundation Company involves financial and administrative commitments, the legal protections and structured governance it offers can mitigate risks associated with decentralized protocol management. The dYdX DAO must carefully evaluate the need for each subDAO and ensure that it aligns with the long-term strategic goals of the protocol.

Conclusion

Cayman Islands Foundation Companies offer a robust and adaptable legal structure that can be effectively utilized by dYdX subDAOs. By incorporating subDAOs as Foundation Companies, the dYdX DAO can ensure that its decentralized governance model is supported by a formal legal framework, enabling efficient operations, legal enforceability, and long-term sustainability.

II. Guernsey Non-Charitable Special Purpose Trusts and Their Application to dYdX subDAOs

  • Overview of Guernsey Non-Charitable Special Purpose Trusts

Guernsey's legal framework, particularly under the Trusts (Guernsey) Law, 2007, allows for the creation of non-charitable special purpose trusts (SPTs). These trusts are specifically designed to hold and manage assets for purposes other than charitable aims, providing a flexible and secure structure that is particularly well-suited for decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) like the dYdX Ecosystem.

SPTs do not have beneficiaries in the traditional sense but are instead established for specific non-charitable purposes, which can include the management of decentralized protocols or other specific objectives critical to a DAO's operations.

  • Key Components of a Guernsey Non-Charitable Special Purpose Trust
  1. Establishment and Legal Infrastructure:
    • Creation: An SPT is created through an instrument in writing, which clearly defines its non-charitable purposes. These purposes must be lawful and clearly articulated in the trust instrument. These purposes would be enshrined in the governance proposal as passed by DYDX token holders. For more information, please refer to the Governance section.
    • Proper Law: The trust instrument should specify Guernsey law as the proper law governing the trust, ensuring that all matters related to the trust are interpreted under Guernsey’s legal framework. This ensures legal clarity in relation to the subDAO’s operations. 
  1. Enforcer:
    • Role: Unlike traditional trusts, an SPT requires the appointment of an enforcer, whose fiduciary duty is to ensure that the trustees (as appointed by DYDX token holders) administer the trust in accordance with its specified purposes. The enforcer is a crucial figure, as they provide oversight and accountability, ensuring that the trust’s objectives are met and that its purposes are adhered to.
    • Appointment: The enforcer is appointed through the dYdX Chain governance framework and can be an individual or a corporate entity, and their appointment, powers, and duties are detailed in the trust instrument. The enforcer must not be the trustee of the trust, to avoid conflicts of interest.
  1. Trustees:
    • Appointment: Trustees are appointed through the dYdX Chain governance framework to manage the trust property in accordance with the trust’s purposes. The trustee must act in good faith, with the best interest of the trust’s purposes as their guiding principle.
    • Duties: Trustees have fiduciary duties to manage and protect the trust property, ensure compliance with the trust’s terms, and maintain transparency through proper accounting and reporting.
    • Removal: Trustees can be removed by the enforcer, the DYDX token holders through the dYdX Chain governance framework or the court if they fail to fulfill their duties or act contrary to the trust’s purposes.
  1. Trust Documentation:
    • Trust Deed: The Trust Deed would contain the purposes and mandate as envisaged in the proposal that is passed by DYDX token holders through the dYdX Chain governance framework. This is the primary document outlining the trust’s purposes, the roles and responsibilities of trustees and the enforcer, and the applicable term of the trust’s operation.
  1. Legal Obligations and Compliance:
    • Fiduciary Duties: Both trustees and enforcers are bound by fiduciary duties, including the duty to act in good faith, to avoid conflicts of interest, and to ensure that the trust operates in line with its stated purposes.
    • Regulatory Compliance: The trust must comply with all relevant Guernsey laws, including anti-money laundering regulations and any reporting requirements imposed by Guernsey’s regulatory authorities.

III. Application to dYdX subDAOs

The dYdX DAO can effectively utilize Guernsey non-charitable special purpose trusts to manage its subDAOs, ensuring that decentralized operations are legally structured and enforceable.

  1. Establishment of SubDAOs:
    • A dYdX subDAO can be established as a Guernsey SPT, with the trust deed clearly outlining its mandate, such as protocol development, operations, or treasury management.
    • The trust deed would specify the dYdX DAO as the settlor, with defined non-charitable purposes aligning with the DAO’s objectives.
  1. Governance and Oversight:
    • The enforcer, appointed by the DAO through its governance process, would ensure that the subDAO adheres to its purpose, providing a check on the trustee’s actions.
    • Trustees, possibly comprising experts in relevant fields, would manage the subDAO’s operations, ensuring that resources are effectively deployed towards achieving the DAO’s strategic goals.
  1. Legal and Financial Security:
    • By establishing subDAOs as SPTs, the dYdX DAO ensures that its decentralized operations are legally secure, with clear accountability mechanisms.
    • This structure also allows the subDAO to engage with traditional financial systems, enter into contracts, and manage assets in a legally recognized and enforceable manner.
  1. Risk Management:
    • The SPT structure provides a layer of protection, ensuring that the trust property is managed in accordance with the DAO’s objectives, reducing the risk of mismanagement or unauthorized use of funds.
    • The enforcer’s role is critical in this regard, providing ongoing oversight and the ability to take corrective action if the trust deviates from its intended purpose.

Conclusion

Guernsey non-charitable special purpose trusts offer a robust and adaptable legal structure for the dYdX DAO to manage its subDAOs. By utilizing SPTs, the DAO can ensure that its decentralized governance model is supported by a strong legal framework, enabling effective and secure management of its operations. This approach not only enhances the DAO’s operational capabilities but also provides the legal enforceability and accountability necessary for long-term success in the decentralized finance space.

Introduction

The complexity of operating a decentralised exchange like the dYdX Chain presents significant challenges. Transitioning control of the dYdX Chain to DYDX token holders without any formal organisational structure could lead to stagnated development and mismanagement of the protocol. Traditionally, decentralised communities rely heavily on the DAO and community members to drive protocol development. However, at this stage, it is unrealistic to expect the broader community to possess the specialised knowledge required to manage all the intricate parameters and functions necessary to operate an exchange as sophisticated as the dYdX Chain.To address this challenge, the dYdX DAO has decentralised protocol development by delegating specific responsibilities to subDAOs. These subDAOs are tasked with overseeing key functions of the protocol, allowing subject matter experts to play a more significant role in decision-making on behalf of the community. Meanwhile, the DAO retains ultimate authority over the execution of changes to the underlying protocol. In essence, the DAO delegates decision-making to contributors with specialised expertise while maintaining overall control.

Current dYdX subDAOs

At present, there are two active subDAOs within the dYdX ecosystem:

  1. Grants subDAO (dYdX Ecosystem Development Program)
  2. Operations subDAO

The dYdX community is also exploring the possibility of establishing a third subDAO to manage the treasury. The long-term vision of the dYdX DAO is to deploy multiple subDAOs, each dedicated to specific activities that contribute to the protocol's development and growth. This section outlines how the dYdX Chain community can establish subDAOs to fulfill these roles.

What is a dYdX subDAO?

A dYdX subDAO is a team of core contributors, funded and mandated by DYDX token holders, through the dYdX Chain governance framework to achieve specific goals as determined through the corresponding governance proposal. These subDAOs are incorporated as independent legal entities, enabling them to employ team members, interact with traditional financial systems, and enter into legal agreements with service providers (capabilities that are essential for effective operation within the industry).

When is a subDAO needed? 

The DAO should consider forming and funding a subDAO for long-term projects or initiatives that are deemed core or key competencies of the protocol. SubDAOs empower the dYdX Chain community to build, employ, and retain high-quality teams capable of driving the protocol's development and growth. These teams are crucial for maintaining the protocol's competitive edge and ensuring its continued evolution.

What are the risks of creating a subDAO?

Establishing a new subDAO involves a significant financial commitment and comes with an administrative burden. It is crucial to carefully evaluate the necessity of creating a new, standalone subDAO and to justify its formation. The decision to spin up a subDAO should be driven by a clear and pressing need, ensuring that the resources allocated to it are used effectively and efficiently.

Who should Contribute?

The entire dYdX Chain community is encouraged to contribute to the success of dYdX subDAOs. This participation begins with active involvement in the governance process, including engaging in initial forum discussions, providing feedback on proposals, voting on key decisions, and overseeing the ongoing activities of the subDAOs.

Members of dYdX subDAO teams should be top-tier talents in their respective fields, with a deep passion for the industry, DAO governance, DeFi, and perpetual trading at the protocol level. These individuals will play a critical role in advancing the dYdX protocol and ensuring its long-term success.

By leveraging the expertise of subDAOs, the dYdX DAO can effectively manage the complexities of protocol development while maintaining decentralised governance and community involvement. This structured approach ensures that the dYdX Chain continues to evolve and thrive in a rapidly changing industry.

Decentralized Organizations

Decentralized organizations are not new. There exists a wide selection of research literature to help us understand the principle of organizational decentralization. The concept is most commonly used to describe organizations that distribute decision-making to individuals across different levels of authority, in contrast to centralized organizations where decisions center at a single point (Mintzberg, 1989). Decentralized organizations carry out a process of devolution, where the power of making decisions is transferred from senior managers to members lower down the organizational hierarchy (Hales, 1999).

Decentralization is used to improve decision-making given the increasingly complex nature of businesses and their needs to respond quickly (Mintzberg, 1989). Centralized organizations benefit from the efficiency of a single authority. However, it’s unreasonable to expect one individual to have the answer to every business problem. By promoting responsibility and authority to individuals with higher subject matter expertise, the quality and responsiveness of decisions are improved.

The process for decentralization, however, is not as straightforward. Degrees of decentralization exist, with different stages of decision-making and authority distributed across each step. Mintzberg defines these stages as: information, advice, choice, authorization, and execution. A fully centralized organization keeps every stage within a single authority, while decentralizing organizations distribute these stages across levels of hierarchy to find the optimal degree of delegated authority. The choice of what decisions to devolve, and the extent to which authority is granted, can vary significantly (Hales, 1999). Ultimately, this becomes a decision unique to each organization.

Decentralization is also thought of in terms of reducing hierarchical controls to create a completely flat organization with no barriers. But research shows decentralized organizations may actually have a higher need for internal controls to manage individual autonomy at scale (O’Grady, 2019). Coordinating individuals is among the biggest challenges to efficient decentralization. A lack of controls can lead to uncoordinated decisions with no clear direction for individual efforts. Controls should exist to coordinate efforts productively, albeit without dampening the efficiency of autonomy gained from decentralization.

In the end, research shows us that decentralization is to be defined at an organizational level. While Mintzberg and others explore structures that help guide future models, organizations working through this process need to do so in a personalized approach to meet their needs and match their optimal structure.

DAOs

Meanwhile, internet organizations built their own version of decentralization using networks. Early research identified the power of networks in allowing internet organizations to coordinate autonomously within an online network (Kreutler, 2021). Eventually, this was adopted by crypto researchers to create decentralized autonomous organizations (“DAOs”). Vitalik Buterin introduced the term in 2014, defining a DAO as an autonomous internet-based entity with internal capital that is managed through automation while also employing individuals to run it.

DAOs introduced something not found in previous research: an automated protocol that enforces rules on the organization. Instead of relying on a centralized authority such as senior management, DAOs use smart contracts to manage the organization in a permissionless manner. The single point of decision-making is replaced by a set of smart contracts. This is what allows a DAO to be decentralized. All members of the organization hold authority on the smart contracts, removing the need for a senior member to execute decisions.

dYdX, like most other blockchain-based protocols, uses a token (“DYDX”) to govern on-chain smart contracts and off-chain DAO or protocol related matters. The Community governs the protocol by holding DYDX, and participating in decision-making by voting on governance proposals. Voting power is determined by the amount of DYDX held - 1 token equals 1 vote. Governance proposals in this setting can be thought of as decision-making in traditional organizations. Instead of distributing decisions across the organization’s hierarchy, all members of the DAO participate in each decision.

To account for obvious attendance problems, most DAOs include a minimum quorum requirement in the decision-making process, needing only a percentage of the total voting power (e.g., total token supply) to participate in a proposal for it to be validated as a decision. In dYdX, for example, the minimum quorum for an on-chain vote is 2% (20M DYDX). dYdX has different requirements for different types of proposals. Most DAOs also include voting delegation, which allows holders of DYDX to delegate their voting power to other, more active participants.

Looking back at the distribution of decision-making authority found in more traditional decentralization (e.g. Mintzberg), protocols take a radical step in the process. Instead of optimizing for the appropriate degree of devolved authority, DAOs attribute all voting members of the protocol with identical levels of decision-making power. There is no clear delineation for Mintzberg’s decision-making stages across members. The protocol provides the opportunity for any member to participate in all stages of decision-making, and expects a minimum quorum of members to participate in voting on the decision to make it valid.

While the ethos of crypto encourages maximal decentralization, DAOs are at the risk of erasing the benefits of distributed authority from their radical implementation. Much like a centralized authority couldn’t manage a complex organization without distributing decision-making authority down to lower levels, it’s difficult to imagine an efficient organization that depends on each member weighing in on every decision. DAOs should instead look to optimize for decentralization in the same way traditional researchers argue for thoughtful devolution of authority.

subDAOs

There is overwhelming agreement among researchers that decentralization includes the transfer of responsibility from ‘those with accountability for the organization as a whole to those with accountability for smaller subunits of the organization’ (Hales, 1999). It only makes sense that DAOs should mirror this structure as a means of combating issues with radical decentralization.

This is where subDAOs come in. A “subDAO”, also known as a working group, manages specific functions of a protocol and/or DAO through delegated decision-making authority to individual contributors and/or service providers. In subDAOs, a subset of contributors are appointed to manage functions based on their skill sets. In doing so, the DAO is reconfiguring its distribution of decision-making authority to a more productive subunit of the protocol. The necessity for all Community members to participate in every stage of decision-making is removed.

Mintzberg introduces the concept of horizontal decentralization, which is defined as the standardization of skills among members working in parallel within an organization. Although only ‘relatively decentralized’, this structure benefits from improved productivity by delegating some stages of decision making to subject matter experts. We expect subDAO contributors to decide on information, advice, and choice on behalf of the DAO, leaving the community with the responsibility of authorization. In other words, subDAOs submit thoughtful recommendations and the DAO votes on their decisions.

Six Types of Decentralization (Mintzberg, 1989). subDAOs are a Type IV.

Just as traditional decentralization requires additional controls to manage increased autonomy, DAOs must be intentional in maintaining controls when establishing subDAOs. subDAOs should not undermine governance contracts to the extent that core protocol decisions can be executed without DAO approval. Instead, they should feed into the overarching governance structure to improve organizational decision-making. By limiting delegated decision-making authority a DAO maintains controls on decisions. Instead, subDAOs are now held accountable for the decisions put forth through their work largely done across the information gathering and recommendation stages.

In the end, DAOs maintain decentralization in authorizing and executing protocol-wide decisions, but devolve information gathering and recommendations to individual contributors with subject matter expertise. The result is a horizontally structured community, with contributors working across protocol functions on behalf of the DAO while still reporting to it for execution of their decisions.

This document is meant to serve as a possible framework for establishing subDAOs. The first section of the document provides a background on decentralized organizations and the logic behind subDAOs. The second section is a reference guide for how the Community can establish subDAOs, with information on legal entities, operational procedures, governance, maintenance, accountability, and community assessment.

Although we recommend reading the first section for a contextual understanding of the problems with decentralization and benefits of subDAOs, readers seeking practical guidance on forming a dYdX subDAO can jump to the second section.

This document will not provide guidance on which subDAOs the community should launch, nor will it make recommendations for future subDAO proposals. The community will be responsible for determining which subDAOs are needed to help manage the current and future iterations of the dYdX protocol. Similarly, this document will not provide legal guidance for establishing an entity, but rather, suggestions for how to go about it.

Community members should use this document to better understand the process for launching, managing and operating subDAOs. Ultimately, the goal is to guide the community towards a thoughtful and scalable growth of the DAO and protocol.

We created this playbook to help the dYdX community navigate DAO governance and subDAO formation. We have combined our own experience, lessons learned along the way, and knowledge from industry to leaders to build a guideline to efficiently forming subDAOs.