Skip to main content

Compensation Model

Purpose (Why)

So far, Samara only dealt with a single type of compensation, called contributions:

  • historical contributions (recorded in Google sheets)
  • personal contributions (work done on the side)
  • external contributions (financial or knowledge transfers)
  • quest-based contributions (Hypha quests)

In addition, Samara has developed an interim compensation model:

  • define HUSD need in advance (based on fiat needs)
  • propose commitment (%)
  • do the Co-Ev process
  • update commitment
  • use 3 salary bands related with contribution (%): 70k for 1%- 49% contribution, 90k for 50%-79% contribution, 110k for >80% contribution
  • HUSD amount pay and the rest in Samara tokens with 1.8 multiplier

The purpose of this policy is (1) to anchor the compensation model on the approach outlined in The Chronicles of Samara

  1. Role and badge archetypes to anchor complexity, skills and membership levels
  2. Circles, assignments and budgets when they are more developed 
  3. Dynamic commitments and contribution accounting when available

and (2) to better integrate 4 key components of compensation:

  1. Mindshare (how much of your life you give to Samara)
  2. Complexity (the anticipated intensity or difficulty of the work you do for Samara)
  3. Value (the actual value your contribution brings to the organization)
  4. Bonus (the go-above-and-beyond recognition as a generic multiplier added on top)

The following chart visualizes all 4 components, starting at the bottom:

  1. Dividing mindshare into quests, contributions and roles
  2. Encoding complexity a priori through the allocation of the funding, expenses and salaries
  3. Decoding value a posteriori through the contribution level, proof of work and role archetypes (+OKRs)
  4. Adding a bonus through the membership level and badge archetypes

Note that complexity is tied to a role-assignment within the context of a circle (e.g. a senior front-end developer for the DHO sub-circle in Hypha) and the value is decoded and voted on in an organizational context. 

Implementation (How)

Let's try to spell out a possible new approach for Samara:

Goals (TBD)

  • try to move the salary discussions off the table so that they are no longer front-and-center (this is a major source of contention in any organization)
  • try to stay away from any comparative measures (my experience vs yours, my commitment vs. yours, my needs vs yours etc)
  • find a compensation model that is fair and equitable for members, allows for a personal growth pattern, and aligns with the goals of the organization

Model (TBD)

  • everyone has the freedom to choose their distribution of mindshare
    • the overall distribution across all activities cannot exceed 100%
    • you are encouraged to adjust your commitment levels accordingly
    • there is no connection between level of commitment and complexity
  • the circle (pod) decides what the level of complexity is for a given task/quest/role ("job")
    • intense or difficult tasks/quests/roles are rewarded higher (e.g. B3)
    • simple or repetitive tasks/quests/roles are rewarded lower (e.g. B1)
    • alternatively, all tasks/quests/roles are rewarded equally (e.g. UBI)
  • the organization decides if the task/quest/role has contributed value to Samara or not
    • tasks are proposed and voted on by each member 
    • quests are co-evaluated for each milestone and member
    • roles are evaluated and re-confirmed every 3 months 
  • the salary is based on a compound token model
    • any activity will earn SVOICE in USD equivalent terms
    • long-term contributors are expected to earn more SAMARA tokens ("deferring")
    • incentives for SAMARE tokens include a 1.8 multiplier that degrades over time

Examples (What)

 

Back to top