Samara's Compensation Model

 

Compensation

The compensation in Samara is based on a token mix that consists of SAMARA (equity/value token), SVOICE (voting weight token), HUSD (USD equivalent token), and possibly Seeds currency, if a reserve exists. This mix is determined by a "formula" that converts the USD Equivalent into the right mix of tokens. See the Samara Token page for more details on each of the tokens in use.

Compensation for contributors

Currently every contributor to Samara is compensated in the following way:

Example: 

Compensation for investors

$1 investment = 1 SAMARA, multiplied according to the active multiplier.

Current distribution of tokens to contributors and investors

The current way Samara allocates tokens is through this Compensations Spreadsheet . This is far from ideal but works as a record of all the contributions to Samara until the DHO is operational. It details historical contributions and earned compensation, including and the exact amounts of SAMARA, HUSD and SVOICE.

Salary Bands

Defining a salary for a role is an extremely difficult task to do. There are many, many variables involved in finding a fair and equitable salary for everyone in the organization. 

For these early stages, Samara is using three salary bands, namely B1 ($70k/year), B2 ($90k/year) and B3 ($110k/year). These bands are directly connected with the commitment levels, B1 for up to 49%, B2 for 50% - 79% and B3 for over 80%. See below for how we plan to evolve this structure. 
bands1.png

Commitment

We define commitment as “mindshare” - not how many hours per week you work on an assignment. This is a new, challenging concept for many people used to being valued by the hour and living in a society largely organized around the 40 hour Monday through Friday work week.

Here’s how we think about mindshare: 

Members propose their commitment at the start of the cycle period and self-assess their actual contribution level after the cycle period ends. As well, Samara conducts a Collective Evaluation, a community building exercise where the team comes together to assess each other’s’ contributions – both their perceived quality and demonstrated commitment level.

This Collective Evaluation is not intended to dispute contributors’ honesty or create a hidden, hegemonic equation that determines the “true” relationship between amount of visible “work” and commitment level. It is intended to provide an opportunity for teammate feedback to be incorporated into self-reflection, and for invisible work, effort, awareness to be made visible and receive social recognition. Contributors retain complete autonomy to keep their original commitment level, or adjust it up or down after Community Evaluation.

Minimum commitment in Samara is 30% for regular assignments. Please note that your total level of commitment for the sum of all assignments cannot exceed 100%.

Commitment vs Contribution - future model

There is a new pattern arising with the introduction of contribution accounting (a co-evaluation process in which all participants openly rate contributions of everyone else). Personal commitment levels can vary widely from day to day, but what we "see who showed up for the work" is pretty clear and in front of us. With contribution accounting, we can move from personal commitment (what I think I did) to collective contribution (what we think you did). This step gives us an opportunity to explore an "open ceiling of human potential" - we simply don't know yet how far our passion can take us (think flow states, eudaimonia, potentiality, dream states, etc). All what counts is if you "were there and brought value back to the collective." How you got that value is not relevant (maybe you were in a flow state and received a download!).

Note that this pattern only works for group contributions like quests, not for individual contributions and roles that are more predictable, pre-determined and personal ("I am committed to this role in a 50% capacity"). We do have the option of due diligence during quarterly reviews ("I haven't seen you around for a while, are you still at 100%?") but those tend to lean towards performance tracking, a pattern we want to stay away from. However, even if we are planning to introduce a drastic change - dynamic commitments allow you to adjust your current level on a weekly, even daily basis ("I am going away for the rest of the day", I will take the next few days off"). This requires a high levels of trust and openness in the organization, which is exactly the foundation of Samara. 

Lastly, dynamic commitments  and the separation of commitment from contribution level resolves a critical bottleneck in this organization - let's say you have an assignment at 100% commitment; it is impossible to add more work (as it should be), but if you temporarily reduce the commitment to 90% (via dynamic commitment) you can join a quest and take full advantage of contribution accounting - now the collective decides how to decide on the payouts of the quest pie and if you had a deep insight during the quest, you will be fully rewarded! 

Future models for role and badge archetype

The goal is to match qualified applicants with open job postings. In traditional job markets, this process is overtaxing, one-sided, prone to trial & error and a guessing game between pretense & perception. In a decentralized human organization, we are using role archetypes as attractors for applicants and badge archetypes as qualifiers for applicants to optimize the matching process and to reduce bias. Role archetypes represent the complexity of the job and the capacity of the organization to support positions (e.g. the organization might have room for 5 storytellers at a complexity level of B3). Badge archetypes represent achievements and skillsets of applicants. Both archetypes are used to find the right applicant for the assignment. 

image-1618346901310.png

Salary Bands - future model

Samara is analyzing a model with an universal, unique band, and two additional levels of rewards for complexity/intensity. 
Universal, Consistent & committed ‘Work/Play-Pay’ (B1) 
If the group intelligence agrees and there exists capacity (financial and organizational), you can take on more complexity, which necessarily takes up much more time and energy. There are currently two Gratitude/Gift bonus compensation increases which reward higher complexity and intensity. 

Complexity/Intensity Recognition Rewards: 

Mid Complexity recognition (B2):
Max Complexity/Intensity potential recognition  (B3):

Revision #38
Created 9 April 2021 18:51:26 by joachim
Updated 24 April 2021 14:49:37 by joachim