Pocket needs a shared mission and shared values, and recurring annual quantitative and qualitative goals supporting that mission and values, which represent ALL entities Pocket, namely PNI and PNF at this moment

Vitaly has been asking for similar needs on den very often; this is where the thread got initiated on forum by myself. Please read the longer posts below for the details.

  1. Does Pocket as an overarching entity have measurable goals/KPIs/business metrics and a dashboard presenting actuals VS goals for transparency and accountability purposes?

A) Such as 2022 is almost over. On what basis should 2022 be declared a good or a bad year?

B) In addition, what are we trying to achieve in 2023 quantitatively and qualitatively?


Vitaly | Linen Wallet,
Great question. Could you pls clarify if this question is addressed to the Dao that operates the network or to PNI that develops software?

Jackal I POKT
I can help answer 1

Pocket Network Inc (PNI) as an entity has their own KPIs but these don’t necessarily reflect the DAO’s broader KPIs. PNI is actively working on being more transparent about their priorities and progress there.

We currently have a proposal to make the Foundation a more active entity who will help steward the ecosystem and build out the DAO. One of our plans for Q1 2023 is to help the DAO to work more proactively towards and align around KPIs.


Before I start, here are 4 declarations and/or requests:

  • My attempt is to come from first principles and of radical transparency.
  • I will question the basics and already established consensus.
  • Questioning should be received as curiosity, willingness to contribute and feedback from outside, instead of being ignorant of the incumbent practices and constitutions.
  • Absolutely nothing is directed towards any individual. That’s not how we will become the railroad of the Web3 economy.

I was preempting the responses and questions, but those are within the boundaries of the current establishment.

For the sake of this exercise, how about I challenge the esteemed stakeholders to step backwards and pretend that the current establishment doesn’t exist?

And we will just call it Pocket for now, no PNI and no PNF or DAO.

Possible rebuttal- “Oh but that’s not how we are structured, we are separate entities.”

Response- Nomenclatures and structures don’t precede fundamental questions such as:

  • What problem in the world are we solving?

People, tools, systems and processes should enable the fundamental mission and the values. The former feeds the latter and not the other way round.

And that leads us to-

  1. Do we have a common mission and set of values?

Now let’s be granular and time-bound-

  1. Was 2022 a good or a bad year for Pocket, and how is it measured?
  2. What are Pocket’s quantitative and qualitative goals for 2023?
  3. What are the KPIs for quantitative goals?

2), 3), 4) and everything we do should take us at least one step (hopefully more) closer to 1). That includes any entity, org and governance we create.

Possible rebuttals- “oh this is not a corporation/firm” ; “oh this is web3”

Sure but why does it have to be either/or to find an optimal model and solution?

Such as “decentralisation” should undoubtedly be one of our core values. And if that’s the case, then supporting principles, practices and structures such as credible neutrality, token governance, DAO, related compliance and regulation, etc become inevitable.

And if that leads us to PNI developing the software and DAO (through PNF) operating the network and those having their distinct set of goals and KPIs based on their purpose of existence, so be it!

But there needs to be a confluence of mission and values as the genesis.

The rudimentary question is- isn’t every single Pocket stakeholder and entity working towards a common greater cause? If the answer is a resounding YES then we should absolutely have a common set of measurable and time bound goals.

Where is the accountability otherwise as Pocket?

And that’s how the greater world will always see us and judge us, irrespective of our internal structures and orgs.

Web3 is here to serve humanity, humanity isn’t here to serve Web3. We have to be careful to not create our own bureaucratic echo chambers, and then slide away from the realities.

Such as: vast majority of users ultimately want cheaper, faster, safer and better products/services. Will that change because of Web3?

Before I digress any further, I will stop here and patiently wait for comments from the stakeholders.



I’m a general supporter of defining our KPIs, metrics etc out as a dashboard so we can show some transparency and hopefully ‘wins’ to the market.

I believe Vitaly made a stab at defining some of the metrics that we should employ, I’d think it’s best to have the community focus on what we want to measure and we go about doing that as a next step.


Could those be repeated here please


Just to make it a bit clearer- KPI, etc come at a later stage.

My humble attempt is to hopefully have us think/rethink the “genesis”, and start with philosophical questions such as why are we here, what is our purpose.

I believe that any individual or entity that is associated with Pocket (PNI, PNF (DAO) to make it simpler) and/or has stemmed from it should have a shared mission and shared values first.

Everything else such as goals/KPIs, structure, bifurcation, governance, resources, basically everything, comes later in support of that mission and the values.


Thanks all for your contributions to this valuable discussion.

Just to build on some points shared by Jack earlier and to provide a view on behalf of the (hopefully) incoming Foundation team and directors:

  • We agree that the fundamental building blocks outlined here are an essential part of connecting the whole DAO. Note that when we say DAO we mean the collective network-wide organization that encompasses PNI, PNF, and any other Pocket stakeholder. No matter what we are working on as part of Pocket we need to have this shared organisational DNA of mission, values and goals. We want all the DAO’s contributors to be Highly Aligned, Loosely Coupled: where we share the same understanding of what Pocket is and what we are striving for, while retaining our individual autonomy and creativity to deliver on those ambitions
  • There are existing elements of mission, values, goals that we can use as a basis for a new set of discussions to take this forward. The Constitution contains a mission and set of Principles (values) for the DAO to adhere to and previously these were defined by PNI which has also internally defined its own values and goals
  • Given the increasing role of PNF in stewarding the DAO, a Q1 2023 goal of ours is to lead the discussions and work needed to exit Q1 with this defined “Pocket DNA” including mission, values, ambitions and some priorities.
  • We plan to introduce a recurring ritual of “Seasons” into the DAO. Seasons will be a common period of months which can align the whole DAO around key priorities and provide the type of detailed metrics and KPIs described above. Perhaps most importantly, Seasons provide natural points for us to review what progress and success we had in delivering on these within the period. We realise this is a new concept and will expand on the idea of Seasons more in the new year.

Hopefully this provides some response to the outlined questions. While PNF will take the lead in facilitating the above exercises, this is really a set of community wide initiatives for which we are simply stewards, and conversations like this thread and in the Den are all welcome contributions to the broader alignment effort. We look forward to the people in this thread and the whole community participating, and welcome any other questions, suggestions or feedback related to this. Thanks again for pushing this discussion and it is great to see our thinking so well aligned.


Hi @Caesar, thanks for kickstarting a thread on this topic

It’s a topic very close to my heart. And before we get to defining our KPIs, we need to agree on our shared mission and values as you put in your diagram above.

While I won’t be able to add much more than what @b3n has said so articulately and comprehensively. I’d like to throw additional weight behind the importance of this objective for PNF.

As soon as PNF is up and running, as envisaged by the Foundation for the Future post, it is priority #1 for me to facilitate a community-wide exercise on behalf of the DAO that integrates a broad set of feedback and opinions to identify and align around the DAO’s key priorities, mission and operating culture going forward. More information will follow wrt this exercise post-launch of the new PNF, and it will lead to some well-defined objectives and documentation around exactly what you are describing, and that we can all hopefully be excited to get behind.

As an aside, you will likely have seen the Pocket Network mission and values document that is roughly 2.5 years old at this stage. It’s absolutely unusual and an exception in my experience for any early startup’s values to stand such a test of time, and to largely reflect the lived experience for those in the community. That’s a real credit to @o_rourke and the other early leaders at Pocket that put these strong foundations in place to develop the vibrant and collaborative culture we all benefit from now.

That’s not to say that any laurels should be rested on, as things are not perfect by any means. Pocket’s culture and values are a strength to be worked on, but they still need a lot of work! Particularly for the DAO and the broader community.

However, referring back to Pocket’s original values doc is just a heartening reminder - for me at least - of why I’m here; the values in this community are genuine and what makes it unique.

As Vitalik said so well,

even a billion dollars of capital cannot compete with a project having a soul


Thank you @b3n and @Dermot for your replies.

The access and the hospitality that Web3 offers to anyone who wants to contribute is still mind-boggling to me.

I am going to presume that you have gone through the entire thread because the 1st post of this need doesn’t reflect the core thesis and argument.

I don’t know if crowdsourcing fundamentals such as mission, values and goals of any project is the best idea. I would think a core group will do more justice but I leave that decision to you.

In the spirit of radical transparency, I am going to repeat and share a few more thoughts:

a) What gets measured gets done
b) Less is more at times
c) Flat org charts with defined roles and responsibilities work better
d) Adding more people isn’t growth
e) Keeping it simple and not taking pride in “we are complex”
f) Asking “WHY” several times before adding a jargon/acronym, sentence, document, headcount, making an investment or a change
g) Last but not the least: web3 is here to serve humanity and not the other way round. Similarly DAO is here to serve the Web3 equivalent of customer, shareholder and employee in public companies, and not the other way round.

The above list is a bit of a digression, but not irrelevant to the subject of this need and to my observations. Could be worthy of some retrospection and introspection.

I am just another investor and community member. Ultimately I neither have the say nor the incentive (beyond a point) to drive such changes in your orgs and teams. I have to trust that the business (or affairs) is in capable hands. However, that gives me the advantages of seeing through the lens of first principles and being radically transparent.

All that being said- happy to help if needed.

Thank you.