Hey FOX community! As many of you know, our workstream recently got approved and just began on May 1. We’ve had some prevalent DAO community members reach out (Erik Voorhees and others) expressing concerns with past Marketing efforts and inquiring about our plans for improving results in the future.
We wanted to create a Forum post sharing some of those concerns while we work toward addressing them as new leaders for the marketing workstream. We agree that much of the previous Marketing efforts were not functioning optimally, producing stellar results, or tracking efforts appropriately, and this is in part why it has now been wrapped up into the new Growth and Marketing workstream.
We will share some of the concerns below as well as some of our responses, point by point. We will address what we will be working on in these next few weeks to rebuild or (create from scratch) the needed marketing plans, goals, and strategies to increase user growth and elevate our brand awareness.
Quote from Erik “Growth is not sufficiently measured… there has been no discussion of app usage in any form. All mentioned KPI’s in the recently passed Budget Proposal focus on community/social growth but not on actual product usage. It’s understood that advanced analytics are mostly absent until Pendo’s integration in Alpha, but we aren’t even tracking domain traffic or partner protocol growth via Yearn, Banxa, & Gem. How many users do we have, and how are we acquiring them? This is THE key question this workstream should be tackling, and there appears to be no focus on it. “ It’s unclear what the focus/priorities are for this workstream. Stated differently, there are too many focuses such that nothing seems to be the focus. What are the one or two most important metrics being focused on?”
Response: We agree app usage, growth data, and KPIs for marketing have been missing; it was not tracked in the previous workstream, and meaningful baseline data has thus been absent, so we will need to create it from the ground up. This is why, in the departure of Petecoin, we took over and brought it back into this stream. Our intent is to very quickly create a new direction/plan for marketing that aims to identify measurable goals that can be shared with the community. Establishing these KPIs will allow the community to see what is and isn’t being achieved from the themarketing stream. To the second point, we have several goals in this stream: we aren’t just Marketing, but Growth, Marketing, Partnerships, and PR. That said, we must and will create clear focuses and priorities for the workstream. We were lacking in time to do so due to the abrupt departure of Petecoin, in order to renew streams to ensure continuity of marketing operations. (edited)
Quote from Erik “Leadership of the workstream is unclear… the proposal establishes 2 or 3 “co-leaders” depending on how it’s read (the three of you). Who is ultimately accountable for the work stream? I know with Ops it’s Tyler. With Product it’s Diggy. With Engineering it’s 0xdef1. Marketing needs one leader who is responsible for the results and success of the workstream.”
Response: We have held many discussions around this topic from leadership calls, retros/office hours to Lunch AMAs. We are working toward a different structure for this stream and have been experimenting for a few months with this idea of dual leadership on a workstream with some success, and very little issues. We are treating running the stream as a discussion or a board rather than a direct hierarchy. This structure allows for two points of contact on leadership needs, collaboration on decision-making, and out of consideration of the ‘bus theory’: that if something were to happen to one of the workstream co-leads the stream would continue to function. We saw the need for this when PeteCoin left the marketing workstream for us to deal with. Multiple leads may not be a solution needed in a DAO, but we are working on this experiment to shake up traditional leadership in a company that’s not a traditional company—because it’s a DAO. With that being said we could do a better job of optimizing the structure, but how it’s presented here: is the clearest form of leadership structure - ShapeShift Organizational Structure This also brought up questions of how the whole stream should be laid out with the idea of one leader and 3-5 full time employees and the rest bounty. In the beginning this was tried with marketing, but as we quickly found out for marketing talent, just bounty work was not providing the results/ talent that we (the DAO) needed. People wanted to contribute with some sense of security, and bounties were going un-utilized while the stack of work piled up. I think large bounty systems work for technical positions such as engineers but were not proving fruitful for marketing roles.
Cost Concerns/ Erik Quote
“This workstream’s cost is too high at $126k per month.
Three co-leads each earning $177k annualized is too much
I’d prefer to see more emphasis on bounties (and their results) vs perpetual salary for so many people”
Response: We’ve attempted to address this in the forum/ ideation posts as well as in conversations in leadership/ other channels. By combining these streams, we are saving a substantial amount in salary over the separate streams alone—Workstream costs have been consolidated, removing 50%+ of marketing monthly bounty fund requests while further reducing salary where appropriate moving into the new term. Four of six LatAm contributors are compensated 1,000USD or less monthly, while Globalization runs lean, with the largest cost being LPX (project/workflow lead) and the new and developing Korea marketing initiative (weekly meetings at 6am EST, please attend!). Further, 20,000USD in one-time costs break down to 10,000USD utilized for a Bitconf sponsorship package, 5,000USD allocated to JoshF for training &/or refund to current workstream contributors that have already paid for training oop, and 5,000USD allocated to c4 for a bulk education resource package for ShapeShift DAO contributors/onboarding/marketing purposes.
We added LindsayLou, which incurred both more salary and a new function; but most would agree that external visibility of our efforts was sorely lacking, and this was needed. Still, our overall costs are less than separate streams combined. This dissolution of the marketing workstream, and establishment of Marketing, Growth, and Globalization, will resolve numerous points of confusion and overlap within the current marketing workflow and in doing so, This workstream merged Growth and Globalization with Marketing and will require a larger amount of leadership time in order to effectively manage the entirety of the team, including the projects within the workstream.
Between product launch coverage, partnership coverage (inbound and outbound), inbound requests for marketing material and coverage on various DAO initiatives (lunahawk NFT auction), web3/community development (US/English marketing), Latin American marketing web3/community development, Education project content production (help/onboarding-related documents, inbound partnership content; share, video content (via Twell’s production team), UI/UX and website content support, and Globalization activities – human capital necessary to sustain essential DAO functionalities demonstrates spend/budget is reasonable for all of the aforementioned positions/roles/projects.
We spent a lot of time on the budget and seeing the best way to trim where we needed and keeping it significantly cheaper than two separate workstreams while still adding some higher level positions. Summary: Talent costs money, and keeping/ adding higher level talent adds a cost. This doesn’t negate the fact that with a higher budget, tracking those higher results is needed, and that’s what we are working toward.
-If you have any comments or feedback of what the stream should be working more towards on the marketing side please feel free to leave a comment and chime in.
The biggest question we are trying to solve here in the short term is How can we measure success and what should the priorities be with this new leadership/ stream?