In order to support the natural expansion of the MetricsDAO community and bring in more analysts, we believe the MetricsDAO ecosystem would benefit from community efforts to strengthen MetricsDAO’s marketing strategy and execution. Therefore, we propose the following statement of work for 1 season to be completed by a marketing contractor.
To contract someone to take ownership of marketing execution and strategy to help ensure the success of the natural expansion of the MetricsDAO community and release of the Metrics App to the public among potential users of the Metrics App, as well as support in maintaining and expanding the MetricsDAO marketing and educational content calendars.
This is a proposal for cryptofreedman#2169 to take on the role of Marketing Manager of MetricsDAO to expand the public’s knowledge of the MetricsDAO ecosystem to allow potential users of the METRICS App to find the platform. All marketing activities should be targeted on potential and actual users of the MetricsDAO App.
The scope of this role is outlined, but not limited to, the items listed under “Deliverables” in this SOW.
This role plans to backfill the roles of the core marketing lead and the social media contributor, and act as an additional content contributor.
Timeframe for this proposal is March 13, 2023 through June 2023.
I’m excited for the possibility to have you a bigger presence at MetricsDAO, @cryptofreedman!
Looking forward to going through the proposal in detail and sharing any feedback here. I’ll aim to share feedback here by tomorrow (March 15th) EOD – within the 48 hour standard period for forum feedback on METIPs.
One question to start with: On a quick skim through, the Scope of Work refers to MetricsDAO’s contractor policy. Is it available anywhere on Discourse, in documentation, etc.? And if not yet – would someone be able to share the contractor policy with the DAO & the community? Thanks!
I would like to see a specific section on instrumenting, data collecting, and analyzing marketing effectiveness metrics. Right now, Google Analytics is being pushed by hlx and Typeform by me. What about all the other channels? There is no overall strategy.
This role should include designing and implementing the strategy on how to instrument and analyze the effectiveness of all of our marketing channels including blogs, Twitter, Typeform, emails, LinkedIn, and Eventbrite.
Thanks for bringing this up! From a tooling perspective, we should definitely have analytics in place for the various marketing channels - looks like someone installed Tag Manager on the site but if that’s not properly connected to a Google analytics account we should fix that.
Twitter and LinkedIn have their own built-in analytics but there are 3rd party tools we can use too (I was looking into this for benchmarking our competitors/partners to get oriented in the space to set growth goals; Buffer and Hootsuite are also on the to-review list for social posting/analytics)
As far as what the particular metrics and goals are, definitely agree that having those in place is an essential part of a marketing strategy.
A couple of clarifying questions that came up for me:
What will be considered high / expanded usage of the Metrics App? The last deliverable mentions service requesters and requesters – I presume it’s meant to be service providers and requesters – aka analysts and partner protocols/projects. Since both sides are targets for marketing, will there be metrics for both, and more generally what will success mean? E.g. comparing app use with the old bounty stack use, or something else?
Course targets: the ones I saw mentioned were
200 applicants into 100 enrolls, which I understand to be per cohort for the web3 analytics 101 live course
40% attendance rate of sign ups – is this applicable for all/or the rest of the course catalog? except the live 101, the rest are all self-paced courses, what would count as attendance? would it help to supplement the self-paced course metrics with signup/completion/or both?
Defining what “high” usage of the metrics app is should be developed in collaboration with the BD team, the product team and the DAO broadly. a marketing lead should not be setting customer / usage targets for a product in a silo. But I think that ‘high usage’ from a marketing perspective means enough visibility throughout the web3 ecosystem that it attracts other data partners to reach out. It also means meeting whatever target the aforementioned teams establish as “high usage”.
and yes you’re right! Providers & requesters here means analysts & partner protocols/data/projects, respectively. I think there’s also been discussions that we would want to expand the types of projects that put in requests, but again, I think that strategy for expanding who puts in requests needs to happen cross-functionally.
As part of the latest planning and discussion for Season 4 DAO budget, I would like to advocate for:
the vote for contracting the Marketing Lead to go out simultaneously with (instead of earlier than) Season 4 pod and budget proposal vote. The two proposals are part of the same bigger picture of the DAO structure, planning, and budgeting in Season 4.
the METIP #15 to flesh out in more detail the expected use of part-time contributors’ time and work.
I’m cognizant that this could be determined more organically once the actual contract period starts! That said, the timing of the proposal which is simultaneous/overlapping with team changes and season budgeting, is what brings it up for me. This will enable DAO pods to plan for contributor/hours they can use, or would try to absorb if the Marketing umbrella won’t use their time.
As well, another clarifying question: Are the personnel in the SOW Budget section and the part-time contributors in the Resources section the same personnel? Or would the DAO need to budget separately in addition to the SOW budget for the 2 part-time marketing contributors listed in the Resources section?
We are pushing to move this to a vote since we need immediate support backfilling marketing roles and getting marketing efforts up-to-speed. In the overall Season 4 budget this contractor role will be taking into consideration when bring forth the Season 4 budget to get approval.
Contributors stated in the “resources” section are Season 3 writers that have already been taken into consideration. We added those in since this proposal is being pushed to start prior to Season 4. If these part-time content contributors are not a part of Season 4 then they would no longer be a resource. If we continue to have these part-time contributors then that would be apart of the Season 4 proposal that would come forth. I do believe it is best that we use the early part of the season to plan work and metrics of success for that part-time content contributors.
In the “budget” section the SOW is outlining that the contractor may also use the budget to work with content writers that are outside the current group of part-time content contributors. They would use the funds from their budget vs a different MetricsDAO budget.
The metrics are as following based on how we think about “marketing” supporting efforts. They are responsible for driving people to rsvp & attend webinars and to apply & enroll into courses. These metrics apply to all webinars and courses that have been validated and brought to market. Webinars and courses that we are still validating would have separate metrics based on that specific project (example: Web Analytics 201 or new webinar session)
I intend to bring a proposal early in Season 4 that moves away from Gold-Silver-Bronze tiers, and towards incentive-based compensation. The simple reason is that the current structure doesn’t serve anyone well:
People who do a ton of work end up getting underpaid
People whose work does not match up well to a fixed rate (e.g. content generation) end up with a major mismatch, i.e. their payment doesn’t match their output at all.
Structuring pay to better reflect outcomes should help address this & ensure that people can be paid fairly based on the work they’re doing.
What Alex has outlined in this proposal, i.e. a contributor applying directly to the DAO for a scope of work, is what we envision for Season 5 and beyond. This ensures that any contributor who believes they can add value is welcome to submit a proposal, alone or as part of a group, to provide ministerial services. This type of permissionless application, which the DAO can consider and then vote on, is much more closely aligned with the values and ethos of the space. Contributors who craft strong proposals should see them pass with no issue, and this also forces strong accountability, since the DAO itself will be the one judging whether a proposal has merit.
I voted ‘yes’ on the METIP so it is late for me to ask questions.
If possible, I’d like to know how the proposed Contractor was selected.
The SOW says the work will be given to CFree Enterprises. Why did we select this particular company?
In most cases it is preferable to obtain quotes from a few suppliers before awarding a contract.
I support this METIP because it should help us grow our audience and onboard new partners. However, I would love to know how this Contractor was selected.