The program aims to motivate Push Community and contributors to actively engage in business development activities for Push Protocol by offering rewards that vary according to the project size and other characteristics.
This initial iteration will primarily be overseen and managed by members of the Push team through the Push DAO. As is the case with our other initiatives, the long-term vision is to gradually decentralize this program and transfer ownership community via the DAO.
The transition process will be refined and adjusted as the program evolves to integrate all lessons learned into the best practices of the program. This marks the inception of the Business Development subDAO.
How It Works:
Contributors actively seek and engage with other projects for potential collaborations.
They assess if the collaborations meet the criteria for Tier 1 or Tier 2 based on Twitter followers, Discord activity, and growth.
Rewards are awarded accordingly based on the tier of the collaboration.
Collaborations with projects having over 100,000 Twitter followers.
Very active Discord communities.
Collaborations with projects having over 45,000 Twitter followers.
Active Discord communities with good growth.
Collaborations with numbers below the 15,000 Twitter followers mark
Collaborations vetted by the DAO Lead and Ambassador Chapters through internal voting.
What defines a Collaboration?
A collaboration consists of two steps:
Ensure that the project you’re talking to makes the announcement from their official Twitter handles and other social channels.
Ensure the project completes the implementation. (Read the rules and guidelines section for more information on what it entails to consider the implementation portion complete)
Reward points are allocated according to the project tier. Please refer to the attached reference table for a detailed breakdown of rewards*.
*Additional rewards apply to Push Ambassadors.
Encourages Push Community and Contributors to actively seek and establish valuable collaborations.
Recognizes and rewards their contributions.
Promotes growth and engagement with other projects.
Ensures clarity in reward distribution through the attached reference table.
Rules and Guidelines:
Push Ambassadors are eligible for a 1.2x multiplier on top of their rewards after successfully finishing the implementation phase.
Participants in the Program can leverage the established Push Infrastructure to contribute to the program’s success:
Grants Program: projects can apply to micro and rapid grants for the implementation portion
Demo Thursdays: invite projects to join our weekly session to showcase what they are building.
Ambassadors chapters: get help from the awesome Push Ambassadors to get your message to more places!
In order to streamline the definition of a successful implementation, the following rules must be fulfilled for any of the integration types (Chat, Notifications, Spaces):
A chat (preferably telegram)must be created with both teams: Push and the Project that will be implementing Push Protocol.
For notifications: Push Team will verify and validate that a channel is created and will observe the subscribers and notifications growth that they look organic.
For chat - upon the successful implementation Push team can observe how many chats have been initiated from a project. Same as for notifications, organic growth is expected
There needs to be proof that the implementation is available in the Project’s front-ends.
Establishing your role in a collaboration is crucial. Save evidence of your project interactions, and remember that official confirmation from the project holds more weight, especially considering more than one person can be talking to the same project.
A form for submitting application proofs will be accessible on the DAO Notion site.
During this initial phase, the oversight and evaluation of applications will be carried out by the Push Team, who will assess whether any additional evidence is required.
The idea is to follow a process similar to what we are doing with Grants. Get community feedback and involvement to ensure we co-desing the program in a way that is engaging and attractive for those who want to participate.
Conversations will start with the 1st Governance Call of 2024.
We are going to spread the word and values that represent the Push Mission and On Boarding process, as a SubDAO we can understand the difficulties and complications that this process needs to break. So we are helping to make this proposal stronger and congratulated.
I like this initiative, many of the projects that PUSH has worked with did the same process, but I think it is crucial to have evidence and something that supports that the work was completed and show proof, with all that information there will be more people interested in participating and continue building within Push, so if anything we can do is to continue giving voice to the mission, values and onboarding people who want to get involved.
I think this is a great first step to developing effective distribution channels for the Push Protocol. I also believe that this could go hand in hand with a more direct BD approach which would target DAOs strategically and get them using Push Protocol through formal proposals which identify beneficial use cases for the target DAO.
While our community will undoubtedly foster valuable collaborations, there will be instances when Push’s Business Development (BD) team will seek involvement to enhance the impact of these partnerships. Once a collaboration is confirmed, numerous avenues become available for us to explore and leverage our infrastructure to promote growth.
Sounds interesting however I think you are missing a point of contact for the Tlg group otherwise it will be difficult to ensure both project communication.
Also, don´t you think that the rewards even for a Tier 1 project is low considering the current price of the $PUSH token?
Ex: If I was getting chat to Binance (the biggest CEX atm) the whole effort will only be worth 300 tokens which is about 60 USD for such an integration and the impact (in brand awareness matters) it will be causing.
I think this initiative will be atractive for the community as long the incentives go according to the effort they mean. There are plenty of people in the w3 space looking for side jobs or dao tasks such as this that could be interested in participating however the reward should be more encouraging in order to grow participation.
You are correct. A crucial element of this program is to foster increased connections with various projects and foster mutual growth with Push. This proposal seeks to outline the framework and emphasize key factors that enable community contributions. The operational aspects will be refined as we make progress in the co-design process.
Another excellent point for open dialogue. Maybe a starting point involves openly discussing with the community the intricacies of initiating a collaboration. What actions have proven successful or unsuccessful, and what strategies have been employed? Quantifying these efforts is more of an art than a science
For the upcoming Governance call it would be a good idea to invite Push’s BD Lead to join and share insights on all this.
Definetly the participation of the BD team would be key to have a deeper understandment!
I think a good reference is the bug bounty program in which the rewards were accordingly to the difficulty of the bug and they went from 1k to 100k USD. In this case, maybe 100k might be a bit crazy but considering the effort (that could mean weeks) of researching, getting the point of contact, constant communication, meetings, convincing and closing the deal and even the follow up until implementation should be better compensated. Even if we compare it to the Rockstars of Push program getting a deal with Binance will be getting you 1/3 (300 $PUSH) of what could get you posting an engaging Twitter thread (900 $PUSH + NFT).
I think interesting amounts could be:
Tier 1: 1k USD worth in $PUSH.
Tier 2: 500 USD worth in $PUSH.
Tier 3: 100 USD worth in $PUSH.
For this prices I’m also considering that for Tier 1 & 2 isn’t just about having +1 integration but great impact in brand awareness matters and plenty of real users (which is what most of w3 projects are missing).
Introducing Rockstars of Push into the equation is a a great idea.
The significance of a tier 1 collaboration for Push is substantial, and incorporating a Rockstar on top of the rewards can enhance its appeal.
Additionally, as emphasized in today’s Gov call, it’s crucial to consider the efforts involved and how contributors can systematically “document” these efforts to secure collaborations.
The first iteration of this Program will provide valuable insights to automate the process as much as possible and establish clear-cut rules.
To streamline this initiative, I recommend initiating a Working Group, mirroring the approach taken with PGPv3. This will allow us to gather feedback from both this forum and Gov calls, consolidating it into a proposal for promotion to the next phase.
Considering the multi-steps that BD involves before getting to the point of an announcement or even implementation, it makes sense to consider a multi-level approach to incentivising BD efforts from contributors. We can consider BD as a process that entails soft steps and hard steps. Soft steps like @incakolitazero pointed out involves things like research, communication, meetings, negotiations, planning, follow up, etc., while hard steps includes things like getting prospects to make an announcement or implement Push products. It wouldn’t be entirely wrong to argue that the soft steps involve much more difficulty, time and work than the hard steps and even lay the groundwork for it. With our current approach, we would be incentivising the hard steps and not the numerous micro activities (soft steps) that help us achieve those hard steps.
An issue with our current approach is that it creates an incentive problem because we have to factor in all the efforts that lead to an announcement/implementation in deciding how much to give as a reward, and this would amount to either too big of a reward (bad for Push/the BD subDAO) or too small (bad for contributors). By focusing only on announcement/implementation, the current approach also creates a high barrier for reward on the part of contributors, which can discourage participation.
An advantage of considering a multi-level incentivisation approach that takes into account all the multi-steps involved in BD is that we can broaden the range of participation from contributors and widen the distribution of incentives among them. Also, it can facilitate division of labour among contributors for a single BD prospect, since different contributors can take on different activities involved in the BD lifecycle for a single prospect and can be incentivised for it, as opposed to a single contributor handling a BD process from start to finish and getting all the incentives for themselves (there are obviously cases where this approach is favoured). There are other advantages such as encouraging participation from first-timers since BD is broken down into different activities that they can choose from based on their strengths and weaknesses, etc, etc.
Conclusively, we can choose to design a multi-level incentive structure for BD as follows:
We can lump BD activities into three phases. Each phase contains activities that receives a reward. The subDAO can always include more activities and decide what phase they come under, as well as the size of the reward
love it! This makes sense to me.
I do see that the 3 phase approach needs to also take in consideration that the 2nd and 3rd phases have the most significant impact on Push.
I completely understand the efforts required just to reach the announcement of a collaboration (phase 1). However, if the announcement doesn’t materialize, the impact on Push remains minimal. While Push gains visibility and discussion in other projects/communities, the growth metrics might not be impressive.
thanks @MrJaf. i think this could be a great addition. locking rewards for phase 1 activities can further incentivise contributors to continue actively working to ensure that phase 2-3 activities are achieved (in respect of tier 3 projects).
also, phase 1 activities done in respect of tier 1 or tier 2 projects can be hugely significant due to the size and relevance of these projects, so it makes sense to allow instant rewards in this case. and honestly, i think we want more effort to be directed towards these sorts of projects, so allowing rewards from the onset here while doing the opposite for tier 3 projects can help achieve that
I agree with this proposal, but I think the reward could be different depending on the project to implement Push communication. It’s not the same If you get an implementation of Binance or 1inch wallet, or u get a small or very new project to implement.
Your points on compensation are spot on @incakolitazero, considering how the different tiers are categorized (Tier 1 > 100k Twitter followers), we should consider improving the incentive structure or adding more tiers. The structure you suggested above definitely sounds fair, especially if you split it into Announcement and Implementation as initially suggested.
Just for reference, the Polygon Twitter has 178k followers, Push has just over 114k followers, and some of the higher follower counts I could find are Aave Labs with 556k followers and Uniswap Labs with 1.2M followers.
So in my opinion, it is definitely worth increasing the incentives for the highest tiers (>100k followers) as these will have a great ROI for Push considering this tier is reserved for some of the most well-known brands in web3, and building an ongoing relationship with them will serve Push well for the foreseeable future. Also looking at the follower counts for Aave and Uniswap, an additional tier should also be added, maybe something like (>250k followers) and (>1M followers).
@christiandike I love your thought process around the multiple steps that are required to get a BD effort to the finish line, a multi-level incentive structure definitely makes a lot of sense, but will have to be designed carefully to avoid gaming the system. It would be great if you could speak more about this and expand on your ideas on the weekly governance call next week