Video Explanation

Loom Video Algorithm Explained

Problem defined

Running peer-to-peer assessments for allocating salaries in RnDAO has shown some inefficiencies.

  1. It is difficult for people to do mental math, trying to objectively allocate GIVE to their peers on Coordinape. The reason is that it is unclear and unintuitive how many points they need to give to which peer to get to a fair salary. The connection between GIVE and Salary is not comprehensible. Tried solution: Daniel came up with the allocation, however now it feels like admin work to go and copy-paste those values. It is still unclear if you want to give more or less based on the peer’s performance, and how much more to give or take.
  2. Contributors lack context about the people they don’t work with
  3. There’s a lack of feedback received after assessments

Solution

The solution aims to simplify the process of evaluation, introducing an assessment based on rating and feedback. Each peer will assess the others based on two factors:

  1. Culture contribution - everyone will evaluate all their peers from 1 to 5 on this
  2. Performance contribution - only contributors that work together will evaluate each other on this factor from 1 to 5 (will have words to these as well for more objective scale - ie. 3 - met expectations, 4 - performed above expectations, etc). The algorithm will default to mid score of 3 for the peers that don’t work together.

Giving those scores will also come with a mandatory feedback field for contributors to fill, this way the process will inspire a more collaborative environment for people to give each other feedback and improve on it.

Rating contributors from 1 to 5, adds a layer of abstraction and allows the peers to evaluate each other without doing mental math of points and market rates.

For the work done data, we propose to link the weekly priorities and tasks pages where people can see who did what instead of making people write them every month additionally somewhere (as they do now in Coordinape).

Peer-To-Peer assessment process

The process works with Google Forms, where each contributor is asked to input their name (from a dropdown) and evaluate all their team members, noting that they only assess their team members’ work done aspect, only if they worked together this past month.

The Google Form is divided into sections - one per each contributor. There are 4 questions within each section:

  1. Assessment of cultural contribution to the team
  2. Assessment of performance contribution to the team (work done)
  3. Feedback questions that cover negatives and positives of each contributor