Hypha Experiments

• Hypha Accelerator Program for Exponential Impact (APEX)
• Hypha and Seeds Impact Metrics
• DHO Pricing Model
• Hypha Reorganization Program

Hypha Accelerator Program for Exponential Impact (APEX)

Introduction

One of the challenges for Hypha is to grow the ecosystem in a healthy and sustainable way. The dominant strategy so far is to launch a large-scale movement (our own SEEDS movement) or movement-of-movements (uniting other movements) through an extensive network of ambassadors and word-of-mouth activities (such as events and campaigns). While this strategy leads to a potentially large influx of new users, it has to overcome the Chasm between Early Adopters and Early Majority. In order to Cross The Chasm, we must come together and find real and meaningful ways to collaborate (going deep). This is where a new, complementary strategy comes into play, called the Accelerator Program for Exponential Impact (APEX). 

This new growth strategy creates a special funding/grant program for "XOs", special organizations that act as accelerators or incubators with exponential impact. This new kind of organization is using a highly tuned socio-ecological, socio-cultural, and socio-technical "stack" that allows XOs to rapidly scale the ecosystem and activate hundreds, if not thousands of new local pilots around the planet. This is done through a deeper awareness of bioregional, communal, institutional and commons-based patterns that become directly embedded in the APEX approach. The primary delivery method for this organization is an "Organization-in-a-Box", "Marketplace-in-a-Box", or "Village-in-a-Box", a simple way to bundle our knowledge artifacts and recipes, to deliver it as a (digital or physical) box, and to capture the feedback in a cybernetic loop that Cheryl Heller calls the Social Design Process. 

Hypha has already prototyped this process through a Meiosis with Samara in which two quests were launched through a contribution proposal in Hypha with the intention to create a separate organization that is very much connected with Hypha through a symbiotic relationship. While the new entity is fully autonomous (e.g. via a separate token and governance model), the relationship remains mutual through a series of bi-directional knowledge and value flows (not unlike Nora Bateson's Symmathesy). As a side effect of this growth strategy, we are able to expand our ecosystem through "waves" in which these new entities can then themselves spawn the next generation of child-entities (a process known as autopoiesis). 

Application Process (DRAFT)

1. Potential XOs review the application criteria and decide to apply
2. A special XO incubation quest is proposed on the DHO (with a new organization account)
3. As part of the application, a clear and concise purpose/aim of the XO must be provided
4. If passed, the organization receives the first round of funding and begins the quest 

Application Criteria (DRAFT)

• A min of 5 XO team members must be present (no max contraint)
• A min of 2 milestones must be completed (no time constraint)
• A min of 1.8 x value/equity must be returned to Hypha (based on HUSD)
• A min set of org metrics must be maintained (e.g. STrAX and Impact Matrix)
• A min set of org DNA must be implemented (e.g. Archetypes)
• A min understanding of core concepts
  • the Regenerative Renaissance (e.g. the Ambassador Program)
  • the Hypha Game Guide  (e.g. slide deck or handbook)
  • the Social Design Process (e.g. The Intergalactic Design Guide)
  • the Chronicles of Samara
  • more here..

Quest Reward (DRAFT)

• The reward for the XO quest is 15-55K HUSD (TBD)
• The applicant has access to the following Hypha resources
  • Multi-tenant DHO for Building your Decentralized Human Organization
  • Ability to create new DHOs via a special document type (to be voted on)
  • Social Collaboration and Messaging
  • Marketing Automation and Relationship Management
  • Video Conferencing and Audio Processing
  • Document and Media Asset Management
  • Web Content Publishing and Website Monitoring
  • Wiki and eBook Publishing
  • Note-taking and Bookmarking
  • API and Widget Integrations
• more here..

Hypha and Seeds Impact Metrics

Approach

Overview

As Hypha (the organization) and Seeds (the movement) are slowly expanding their scopes, we need to build a framework to assess the impact we have on a wide range of initiatives for pilots on the ground and around the planet. While each initiative will have a different impact given the local context, we want to apply a common framework to measure key impact metrics, namely STrAX, a Sustainable Transformation Index developed by Aissa Azzouzi, the Activation Matrix, developed by Joachim Stroh and a System Map for Thrivability developed by Dr. Anneloes Smitsman.  The result is a process (abstracted below) that can tell us how we are doing as our scopes are increasing from the individual-psychological (on the left) towards the organizational-cultural-communal, bioregional-governmental and - as an aggregate measure - the societal and the global (on the right).

It is important to note that we are working from both the individual (e.g. connecting to individuals starting to play the GPP game and become a resident) and the organizational (connecting with new alliance partners through the ambassador academy and network) as well as the bioregional-governmental (e.g. key players like Lisa and Franz working directly with government organizations in Costa Rica or Sweden). Having said that, the initiatives are very much focused on local "hot spots" (explained later) and pursue a complimentary strategy to rewarding broader audiences (e.g. all GPP holders) for participation in Seeds (e.g. via the Game of Seeds approach). 

The map below is abstracted and the actual implementation will look different (see Rieki's Bioregion and Ecovillage deck for examples of a potential UI/UX). 

Deployment Strategy

As Hypha is constantly developing new products for the global network and ecosystem, we need a solid deployment strategy to (1) ensure that the technology and blueprints can be adopted and adapted in a given local context and (2) to collect direct feedback from participants in the field to iterate and refine our solution sets. For this to happen, we introduce Accelerators and Incubators, a special kind of organization called "XOs" with a larger capacity, wider reach & access to pilot spaces on the ground. As part of the deployment strategy, these XOs must run assessments (surveys, interviews, etc) on a regular basis to check the pulse of the network (and as such level of coherence). Depicted below are both Hypha (Core Tech on the left), Accelerators and Incubators (using toolsets such as Org-in-a-Box, Marketplace-in-a-Box and Village-in-a-Box in the center) and the wider global network/ecosystem (on the right). Color coding can indicate the readiness on the ground across the different stakeholders, detailed in the Activation Matrix. 

Activation Matrix

The purpose of the Activation Matrix is to ensure the full participation of key stakeholders on the ground across four different areas:

1. Bioregion & Municipality Activation (the goal is to protect & govern)
2. Community Activation (the goal is to listen & learn)
3. Knowledge Activation (the goal is to map & model)
4. Alliance Activation (the goal is to build & sustain)

Each stakeholder will bring in unique perspectives, skills and expertise to provide for the "fertile soil" from which a potential solution can arise. Note that this approach is strictly "bottom-up", our task is to listen to and to amplify the signals that are already present on the ground. To tie the Activation Matrix to the Impact Metrics, note the "Hot Spots" depicted on the left side of the graphic. This is where the prioritization and the assessments are taking place, before, during and after the deployment of potential solutions on the ground. A color schema can assist in determining the current status of the activation (e.g. "all systems go" for the Community Activation below). To learn more about  Activation Matrix (also called Glocal Impact Matrix), please watch this short video.

Implementation Mechanics

Sustainable Transformation Index

The Sustainable Transformation Index (STrAX) was developed by Aissa Azzouzi and includes an assessment matrix the collects a composite score for Trust, Love and Care. 

Trust

• Transformative Impact PURPOSE INTENTION Statement
• Level of Organizational COMPETENCE to deliver the expected Impact
• Level of Leadership VELOCITY in delivering & managing the expected Impact
• Communication TRANSPARENCY I Impact Delivery ACOUNTABILITY 

Love

• CAPITAL & RESOURCES Intensity & Efficiency
• Degree of EMPATHY I INCLUSION I INTEGRATION of Stakeholders
• Level of COOPERATION with Impacted Stakeholders
• Impact BENEFIT Identification & Distribution

Care

• Impact on PEOPLE
• Impact on PLANET
• Impact on PROFIT
• Impact on PROSPERITY-COMMUNITY
• RISK Management of NEGATIVE Impact

The assessment is applied (e.g. on a 5-star rating scale) across an array of key indicators (in this case the UN's 17 Sustainable Development Goals but it could be any other indicators, such as Kate Raworth's key indicators in the Doughnut Economics model or Seeds economic indicators, targets or objectives). The assessment and rating is done with both the probing organization and the impacted stakeholders and then compared to each other to see which if any discrepancies are becoming obvious. Larger mismatches indicate a higher degree of incoherence.  

When starting a new pilot, a Statement of Purpose is be jointly developed ex-ante to clearly formulate and express the project's intention and implied intrinsic values. During this phase of the project launch, the team is beginning to manifest the impact and to document the outcome by consistently measuring the state of harmony and coherence through the Trust, Love, and Care index.  The project is monitored ex-post with a Statement of Stakeholders Expectations that includes the expected derived values and the perceived transformation potential. 

(source)

(source)

(source)

Third iteration of the impact metrics

Meeting with Aissa, Anneloes and Joachim on Jul 9, 2021.

New link to spreadsheet is here

Video recording is here

Vilcabamba campaign proposal is here

• We agreed to refine the questions to capture the "full picture" (including the intangible side) of the data and to answer "are we really measuring what we think we are measuring?"
• Anneloes proposed to add questions that get us deeper into socio-psychological or human-developmental areas, a necessary component to capture deeper and more meaningful data
• Joachim suggested to break questions into 3 categories (based on work from Aglietta and Orlean, 1982)
  1. Methodical Foundation (is the underlying framework, process and structure in place? are social objects clearly defined?)
  2. Hierarchical Trust (are the necessary relationships in place? are they transparent and not power-over?)
  3. Ethical Care (is the human developmental space covered? do you feel safe to speak up? do you sense any imbalances in the group?)
• We agreed to keep the assessment matrix and evaluation schema that Aissa provided (see right side of the above table)
• We agreed to simplify the questionnaire by moving "Love" as the underlying principle out of the question area and keep Trust and Care. 
• We agreed to provide some more example for the "targets" in the columns (Aissa)
• We explore a survey tool (ideally mobile) to ask the questions and capture the answers (Joachim)

Current questions:

New questions (these are not fully formulated, just a shell):

(source)

The three levels of trust applied to Hypha (from an earlier work piece) - 

The survey tool:

• Select the Stage (EX ANTE, MID TERM, EX POST)
• Select the Targets (Clean the river, Set up solar system, Introduce circular currency)
• Survey the stakeholders (Seeds members, local activists, indigenous tribes, municipality, alliance partners, community members)
  • Rate the level of Trust (Methodical, hierarchical and ethical trust)
  • Rate the level of Care (Methodical, empirical, ethical care)

Finca Sagrada/Vilcabamba:

(Quantifiable) Targets:

1. establishing [N%] of bioregional leadership training program
2. generating [N] values based impact driven ventures
3. regenerating [N%] of the vital watershed, rural community and the environment
4. encouraging sustainability among [N] people for both profitable ventures and the planet
5. utilizing [N%] of an equitable regenerative currency to support this entire ecosystem
6. incorporate Kogi's watershed wisdom they choose to share with the world

Fourth iteration of the impact metrics

Meeting with Aissa and Joachim on Jul 30, 2021.

Preview of Survey App is here

Survey Data spreadsheet is here

Action Plan:

Survey Screens (DRAFT):

• Questions - the survey with (a) stage (e.g. Welcome Survey), (b) Target (e.g. Clean the River, and (c) the question
• Sessions - Simple calendar of events for each day
• Location - Venue coordinates

DNS Settings

The following DNS settings have been added to our DNS hosting provider at Namecheap. 

Fifth Iteration of impact metrics

• we delegate/proxy the data capturing to an "Assessment Team" that is active on the ground
• team can use any kind of tool to capture data - workshop, calls, interviews, events, etc
• requires  a new role and  DHO  to perform - (1) data capture, (2) Kanban PM and (3) the system mapping
• also understanding & relationship building with target groups - beneficiaries & indirect participants (muni)
• learning the DHOing, what Hypha can do to support this efforts
• what Kogi can do to help us understand "mother earth" as a beneficiary

Sixth Iteration of impact metrics

• not ready for deployment due to (1) Hypha's restructuring to Type-2 org (cannot create alliances yet), (2) missing definition and support of Seeds pilots, circularity and governance principles, (3) early stages of a maturity model (e.g. only beginning to grasp what this is about, majority of initiatives are about about KINS/trust building), (4) tensions between a grassroots approach and top-down invention (template-based approach)
• follow up with Ira Kaufman in NYC to discuss this and his book "EmpowerUs!" and ESGs in the context of DHOs. 
• TE/ST - KINS is focused on Trust and Empathy, this effort (as outlined on tis page) is about (measuring) Sustainability and Transparency

Seventh Iteration of impact metrics

• value of impact metrics is on an aggregate  (institutional, bioregional, SDG/ESG/SII) level as well as a feedback mechanism on a cybernetic level (how are we doing?)
• one the Seeds side we are missing a clear MVP/MVT/MVR (Min Viable Recipe or Toolbox) - the VP has been written about extensively
• also missing is a clear direction/definition of launching pilots (like what we did in Vilcabamba)
• Lastly, there's also a missing (more structured and aligned) marketing component that would drive adoption
• we are after an "iPhone moment" changing the way people think about currencies, but trying to do this without a central figure (like Steve Jobs did)
• compared to traditional canvas business models (Osterwalder), our customers are stakeholders and active participants
• two possible ways forward from here: (1) align with Seeds and ensure that the MVR/MVT for impact metric is firmly embedded in the rollout/movement or (2) align with Hypha and develop a more universal approach to metrics that can be applied in any vertical/market independent from the economic models and currencies in use (like a plug-in module for the DHO)
• personally (JS), I like to see the DHO as a "entrepreneurial vessel" that adds new (premium priced) modules to the platform that anyone can use and adapt for their own context (socio-ecological with Seeds, but also socio-economic, socio-psychological and socio-political)

Further discussions

https://strive2thrive.earth/about/ (via Anneloes)

System Map for Transformational Change and Thrivability 

The transformation potential can be further mapped onto a Complex Adaptive System (CAS) to distinguish sustainable, regenerative to thriveable processes. The System Maps that are presented here form part of a visual summary of the PhD research titled Into the Heart of Systems Change by Dr. Anneloes Smitsman, at ICIS, Maastricht University through EARTHwise Centre. The map provides a visual analysis of the systemic thrivability barriers and behaviors that emerge from (old world) mechanistic systems, compared to those from (new world) thrivability systems. For more information on the map, please see the Kumu chart. 

DHO Pricing Model

Purpose

Hypha product development teams have been heads down refining and improving our products. Each team has created outstanding roadmaps, reliable testing procedures, and efficient source control and deployment processes. This document is looking at how we can define revenue streams (i.e. relying less on investors and investment income) by coming up with a pricing model that is aligned with the regenerative renaissance (i.e. not driven by excessive profit motives), while at the same time paying for our infrastructure costs and rewarding all participants fairly.

Assumptions

1. We need to generate sustainable revenue streams that can cover expenses
2. We don’t need to decide the prices now, just put a framework in place
3. Circular economies require revenue
4. The customer wants to pay for features s/he needs
5. The RR (regen renaissance) wants to support it
6. The VP (value proposition) is clearly defined
7. Exact pricing should be part of governance (need to define who/how)

Potential Models

1. Freemium (Max: not feasible until we can reduce our costs per new DHO via automation; orgs need skin in the game);
2. SBP - subscription-based pricing (also on top of a Freemium model, typical SaaS model);
3. UBP - usage-based pricing (also on top of a Freemium model, typical on-demand model);
4. VBP - value-based pricing (let the customer decide, see deck below from CAWW);
5. PPS - paid premium services that are only sold to premium users (mostly providers);
6. PBU - price by users; (no go, see article by David Sacks below)

Notes on models

Freemium Grants

Instead of "free usage until you cross a threshold" or "hidden admin features" we can just issue grants (coupon) for N number of no-fee transactions. 

Variations on UBP usage-based pricing (via Max)

3.1 pay per proposal;
3.2 pay per claim;
3.3 pay per feature;
3.4 pay per redemption (free for EOS);
3.5 pay-as-you-go, although may require a deposit, as well as pricing at broader levels

Premium access features

5.1 Connection to DeFi exchange
5.2 Accounting module
5.3 Incorporation (e.g. as Wyoming DAO)

Premium access pricing can be based on one-time setup fees or additional subscription pricing

Also to consider are options around longer commitment, annual vs monthly.

Teams vs Individual Licenses

Team plans are where the opportunity is, and therefore where founders should focus their energy and resources. Individual plans can be useful to generate leads, but their long-term revenue potential is significantly smaller. Account-level churn rates for Individual plans are commonly around 5% per month, but only 1-2% per month for Team plans. Team plans build on a solid long-term foundation whereas Individual plans are the definition of a Leaky Bucket.

Article: https://sacks.substack.com/p/individuals-or-teams-whos-the-better (via Augusto)

Process

1 select new DHO (e.g. via impact metrics)
2 set pricing model (and other params)
3 propose and launch DHO from parent DHO (hand over protocol)

Tokenomics

1 What tokens to use
2 Staking vs burning
3 Cost of services (infrastructure/capital, labor/roles)
4 Financial/knowledge/value/credit flows
5 Treasury/Store of value

Basics of Hypha tokenomics (Rieki)

Hypha token system accounts:

Access.hypha or stake.hypha (staking)

Staking for the organisation DHO accounts:

"Access level 1"
N staked = contract ABC available and XYZ limits (example: access roles, assignments, contributions (everything we have now) and a limit of 20 (will need to test and tweak) proposals a week).

"Access level 2"
N staked = contract ABC available and XYZ limits (example: access quests, new voting modules, rewards payouts (e.g. dividends), etc and a limit of 50 (will need to test and tweak) proposals a week).

"Access level 3"
Etc

^^ all that we'd need above is for each contract we build for us to decide which access level it falls into and limit use only to the orgs in that access level.

Start here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1toeX1icHDK5Qi85xzw_PhctGZgeITulAEByyn9SLzuE/edit#gid=0

Then we can tweak the access levels (e.g. opposed to saying an org needs to stake 50 Hypha to access Y contract. We say they need to have access level 2 to access (and we can easily change the 50 stake to 75 for that access level)

---

Use.hypha or fees.hypha (fee account) (only recipient able = DAO.hypha or, with

"pay rewards" action = all Hypha is distributed proportionally to Hypha stakers...

"Burn rewards" (needed?) Action = all Hypha in account burned.

"Get Loan" action (for treasury management and more) = receive HUSD at max N% of staked Hypha value. Unable to unstake the collateral amount (or just at all for simplicity?) Whilst a loan is out.

"Mint Voice" action (optional?) = Mints N% voice every N period for staked Hypha (a method to create voice holdings based on weighted equity commitments over time!)

--

We could have a "Voice Faucet" that's distributed to Hypha stakers (e.g. solving that tension @max-g where investors have no voice). So, stakers earn voice by staking Hypha.... Could be a way for others to start having a bit of voice here by committing financially...

We govern the impact of this tool by tweaking the emission rate of Voice to the Hypha stakers (could have a floor to ensure adequate voice to stakers).

Pair this with a increased decay of Voice for inactive Voting and we have a way for those who drop away to have their voice transitioned.

"Cash out" by unstaking Hypha and selling it (end your share of voice disturbution from the staking faucet) and your voice gradually wanes away.

Hypha Tokenomics Model

Our Model (TBD)

• How much "basic usage" can we afford and where is the threshold to UBP?
• Are accelerators using VBP or other pricing model (T&E, Flat Rate)?
• Is there revenue sharing between Hypha and Partners? (blue/orange and green boxes)
• Is there a pricing policy needed and an agreement with Hypha?
• Should we also have a commission program for sales reps?

source

References

The Web3 Index
https://beta.web3index.org/ (fee-based pricing on infrastructure/middleware)

Discussion from Reiki on token-based staking and fee accounts 
https://discord.com/channels/722537361480613950/738713478533087354/858514452097794088 

https://stories.platformdesigntoolkit.com/pricing-platforms-marketplaces-151ab67b130a (Simone Cicero who created the Platform Design Toolkit)

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1NE2gxibDXvgfediqRHRKs7IJjh18P4mO_qpEIr84L4A/edit (Value-based Pricing model we developed at CAWW)

https://speckyboy.com/freelance-design-value-based-pricing/ (more on VBP)

Hypha Reorganization Program

This proposal has not been entered into the Hypha DHO for voting.

(jump to 12mins in)

Purpose

Metamorphosis by Philip Glass sonifying the changes Hypha is going through.

Approach

1. Disentangle & decouple
2. Prioritize & Rebuild

Disentangle

To frame the conversation, we start with a set of leading questions to help everyone focus on the important parts of the program. These questions are best discussed in a real-time session with key stakeholders of the organization, and each stage can have one or more sessions before moving on to the next stage.

Sensing into Hypha

1.   Where is our energy? our motivation to drive change? our North Star?
2.   Where is our boundary? our capacity limit? our level of execution?
3.   Where is our next destination? our potential impact? our next local maximum?
4.   What are our engines? our core products? our drivers for regen growth?
5.   What is our relationship to Seeds - the currency, the movement, the people?
6.   What is it that only we can do? what and where are the needs? 

Activating vs Building

Delineating boundaries

Strengthening core functions

Strengthening core apps

Strengthening symbiosis

Prioritize & Re-build

This stage is concerned with the implementation and execution of the actual strategy and execution for the organization. It works towards concrete steps to get the work done outlined in previous stages. 

Primary strategic elements

• Strategy Roundtable
• Boundaries for core apps and extensions
• Revenue models for core apps
• Revisiting removing-the-keys after the DAO LLC

Deployment Strategies

Deployment Lenses/Facets

Market Segments

• Socio-ecological deployment (how we regenerate earth, CAS, DACs, indigenous communities, a new way to define what is of value, Seeds movement & ecology)
• Socio-economic deployment (how to spin up and sustain local economies, e-commerce integrations, farmer's markets, a new way of coming together,  "marketplace-in-a-box")
• Socio-political deployment (how to build (eco) villages, urban cities, how to get municipal & mayoral support, future-of-cities, "village-in-a-box")
• Socio-psychological deployment (how to work better together, future-of-work, conscious orgs, teal orgs, self-org, "org-in-a-box", Cooperatives, ESGs, DAO LLCs)

Secondary strategic elements

• Branding & communication strategy
• Banking and incorporation (Vast Bank & Wyoming DAO)
  • proof of Smart Contract (and changes to it)
  • selecting a registered agent (in Wyoming)
• DHO adjustments via policy vote
  • Hypha Archetypes (adjusted for new structure)
    • Legacy frame: Development - Research - HR - Sales - Marketing
  • Hypha product metrics (focused on revenue)
  • Hypha membership (not tied to activity, but tied to HVOICE)
  • Role-assignment max period 6 mo

Hypha Strategy Map

Hypha Strategy Activation

Background

DAO Landscape

PrimeDAO Case

• https://primedao.eth.link/ (current site)
• https://primedao.webflow.io/ (future site)
• https://medium.com/primedao/its-time-for-dao-to-dao-coordination-8791ec78545f (DAO-to-DAO coordination, the only DAO thinking about it afaik)
• https://app.pitch.com/app/public/player/05cff6fb-639c-4e24-8497-72e288fc60db (pitchdeck)
• https://alchemy.daostack.io/dao/0x273d0f686a53a49a0fba2a801566b19f9aaf8fcd/scheme/0x4b919ee74b777d004a60f4f99d0b4333299aeafbb89e6a2bd004ea81aa10b825 (PrimeDAO on DAOStack)
• https://docs.primedao.io/primedao/tokenomics/prime-utility (Prime token allocation)

• Value Transfer: Producer > Consumer > Producer > Consumer < Decomposers (Trophic Chains)
• Value Creation: info ecology, autopoietic platforms, regen finance models
• Value Exchange: revenue generation, pricing strategy, economic growth 
•