Proposal Simulation
Overview
This section documents the simulation of the proposal phase within the Mātou DAO conceptual governance model. The goal was to test the process of bringing a proposal from idea through to formal submission, exploring how contributors engage with the system and where improvements are needed to ensure accessibility, clarity, and cultural alignment.
The simulation was divided into four main stages:
- Preparing a proposal
- Creating and submitting a proposal
- Reviewing the proposal
- Creating the proposal decision plan
Each step was documented through live discussion, collaborative drafting, and role-based walkthroughs.
📊 Proposal Flow Diagram (opens in new tab)
Stage 1: Prepare Proposal
Simulation Objectives
- Identify and validate a kaupapa through community discussion
- Ensure clarity of the problem and solution before proposal drafting
Roles & Responsibilities
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Community Members | Propose and validate ideas through discussion and shared insight. |
| Community Stewards | Facilitate idea discussions and support member engagement. |
| Governance Stewards | Confirm when ideas are ready to be formalised as proposals. |
Process
- Community member surfaced an idea
- Discussion took place via channels and calls
- Community stewards helped guide dialogue
- Governance steward confirmed the kaupapa was ready for a proposal
Reflections
What worked well
- Natural discussion surfaced shared interests
- Members felt empowered to contribute ideas
Challenges
- Knowing when a discussion becomes a formal proposal
- Clarifying when a steward should step in
Insights
- Guidelines for "proposal readiness" could help with consistency
- Stewards need tooling to track validated ideas
Stage 2: Create and Submit Proposal
Simulation Objectives
- Capture key details about the kaupapa in a structured form
- Ensure proposer support is available
Roles & Responsibilities
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Community Member (Proposer) | Complete and submit the proposal form with key information. |
| Governance Steward | Provide support to proposers during form completion. |
Process
- Proposer completed the proposal form with outcomes, roles, and budget
- Steward helped clarify sections when needed
- Proposal was formally submitted
Reflections
What worked well
- Clear form structure made it easier to draft proposal
Challenges
- Some uncertainty around budget expectations
- Contributors had different understandings of formality
Insights
- Need for examples and templates
- A step-by-step onboarding flow would help new contributors
Stage 3: Review Proposal
Simulation Objectives
- Confirm that a steward and peer reviewer are assigned
- Ensure the proposal is complete, aligned, and conflict-free
Roles & Responsibilities
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Proposer | Respond to clarifying questions and make any required changes. |
| Governance Steward | Assign a steward, ensure completeness, and confirm strategic and cultural alignment. |
| Governance Steward Peer Reviewer | Review the Proposal Decision Plan |
Process
- Governance Contribution Request created automatically upon submission
- Stewards registered interest and were assigned
- Assigned steward and peer reviewed for completeness and mission alignment
- Questions were asked and edits made as needed
Reflections
What worked well
- Assigning both steward and peer created shared accountability
Challenges
- Contributors unclear on role of steward vs reviewer
- Some stewards were unsure how to engage
Insights
- Stewards need clear guidelines and checklists
- Contributors benefit from transparency in reviewer assignments
Stage 4: Create Proposal Decision Plan
Simulation Objectives
- Define the decisions required and who makes them
- Confirm with proposer and peer reviewer
Roles & Responsibilities
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Proposer | Review and verify the decision plan before it progresses. |
| Governance Stewards | Create, review, and confirm the accuracy of the proposal decision plan. |
Process
- Steward created a decision plan outlining vote steps
- Proposer confirmed it reflected intent and purpose
- Peer steward reviewed and signed off on the plan
Reflections
What worked well
- Planning clarified how each governance group would engage
Challenges
- Initial confusion about order of voting
- Some uncertainty about veto powers
Insights
- Standard templates and diagrams help visualise the path
- Clearer distinction between advice vs decision roles
Summary
The proposal simulation revealed both the strength and complexity of community-led governance. While the process was collaborative, culturally grounded, and purpose-driven, it surfaced areas requiring additional support, onboarding, and structure.
Key Takeaways:
- The pre-proposal process is vital and must be formalised
- Proposers need clear templates and examples
- Governance roles and decision paths should be visualised and well-documented
- Incentives may help encourage broader and more equitable participation
The next phase of the simulation focused on voting and decision-making, building on the groundwork established during proposal development.