Also, MVC.
Minimum viable cohesion.
And minimum viable consensus.
And reframing the MVP as the MVA: minimum viable accomplishment.
To truly be immersed, effective and beneficial in its intended and natural (appropriate) environment, an enterprise must be customer centric, or put differently, evolved in tandem with the benefits it enacts for its customers and their/its environment.
A perfect evolutionary pathway in this sense would result in the minimum need for investments of financial capital, which is what allows allows certain startups to outcompete capital through bootstrapping.
Any deviation from this ideal and theoretical pathway of customer inherence automatically requires more financial capital and longer development/testing cycles.
It takes time to evolve both the knowledge/technical framework of a company, and its culture. During that timeframe, The decentralized org can evolve more targeted/specialized and creative/innovative pathways without relying on a very rigid central framework, and ultimately evolve said framework naturally out of its applied efforts, rather than the other way around.
Counterintuitively, this would result in better and more targeted/innovative knowledge-based communication.
When each part of a system is responsible for its own evolutionary pathway through an environment, only relying on certain pre-established behavioral principles to keep it in basic sync with the rest of the system, and otherwise free to generate applied growth, communication with other parts of the system becomes a symphonic act of syncing only the most valuable parts: knowledge-based communication.
Free from the confines of syncing needs and duties, an essentialism emerges.
And how then, would a decentralized enterprise operate based on actually producible results?
It is not for me to define that, as several frameworks are possible, but the obvious baseline is the MVA: there is a minimum viable degree of accomplishment in each area of a system needed for the system itself to continue functioning.
And therein lies an even more interesting type of function in decentralized orgs, that of a systems wide balancing act, which is neither central nor at the periphery. Increasing output in any one area does not immediately result in growth all over. Increasing number of generated leads, or even sales, for example, requires other functions to scale in order to process/balance the new output.
Financial compensation would thus not be directly linked only to the individual output of system elements, but to the evolutionary fitness of the system itself, using mathematical processing much like the blockchain itself, but less artificial/theoretical in nature.
The final question then, as in any business, relates to the value of innovation versus processing. As is the case with the blockchain, where the current value is driven by infrastructure growth in processing capabilities, but future growth will come from targeted evolutionary growth in specific environments, yet both are valuable and required parts of some future system which is currently only coming into view.
In a DAO, communication faces a similar dilemma of the innovation-processing spectrum.
But how do you even establish communication protocols without a centralized narrative? Back to knowledge-communication.
This is the truly human part of required cohesion and consensus in a decentralized org, that of sense-making and establishing vision around loosely connected and disparate elements.
In this too here must be an essentialism, a directness of knowledge-based vision, or rather vision-based speech, wherein, to make a historical parallel, the Arthurian knights of the round table can speak only when their speech relates to the vision of the whole (the round table and the kingdom), and is in no way communication for the sake of communication or self-focused.
Think of this vision speech as evolving a round wiki: the speech is either on the page and evolving/involved with the wholeness/roundness of the entire system, thus speaking inherently from within the growing vision-knowledge of the company, or it should not happen at all.
There are table manners to swift evolutionary communication, so to say, and they involve this sort of beautiful and focused essentialism that is the very best of cooperation.