This is a topic from the governance weekly meeting along with an article. I believe we need more people to share their opinions and views on the topic of “brand power.” Therefore, I’ve copied it from Notion to the forum in hopes of getting more responses and discussions.
At the end, I’ve also included a brief summary of the viewpoints shared during the meeting.
Why is brand power important?
With countless DAOs globally, many projects cover a broad range of areas, resulting in an interesting phenomenon: while each DAO may have its own areas of expertise, there is often significant overlap in many areas.
For the general public, it’s often difficult to distinguish between different DAOs. One DAO focuses on public goods, and so does another. One is part of the Ethereum ecosystem, and so is the other.
While insiders may recognize the differences, what about those outside the DAO?
This leads to another curious phenomenon: entry-level Web3 knowledge is also abundant, but according to a survey by Cikey, over half of students who have not delved into Web3 say they don’t know where to find learning materials. This sounds quite contradictory, doesn’t it?
But from a marketing perspective, when countless “Web3 introductory materials” all look the same, it means none of them are particularly attractive. The key is not whether these materials are simple or easy to understand, but whether they can capture people’s attention.
“Attention!”
This word sounds familiar. Two things related to “attention” come to mind:
- External public relations (PR directed at the public)
- Brand power
It may seem odd to single out external PR, but for the goals mentioned above, both external PR and brand power are indispensable strategies. Brand power is about recognition, differentiation—a situation where when someone talks about a certain topic, they think of LXDAO specifically, rather than lumping LXDAO in with other DAOs doing similar things. It’s when people say, “I know, that’s the LXDAO that does that particular thing so well.”
External PR, on the other hand, continuously draws public attention to this recognition. We can think of external PR as the energy or fuel that makes brand power shine.
Exploring this concept of brand power is not just about operation or future growth. Instead, brand power is a possible solution to a problem in the Web3 world: attention. When attention reaches a certain level, more people will be drawn to Web3. Once they want to learn about it, they’ll be attracted by the attention built through brand power, shortening the time they spend lost in the vast ocean of Web3. Building strong brand power is like erecting a lighthouse in that vast ocean, giving people a beacon of hope and a push toward seeking knowledge.
What is LXDAO’s brand power?
I once read an article about DAOs that said a DAO’s starting point often comes from a mission or vision. From there, this mission and vision should guide both you and the community.
This sounds pretty idealistic…
But the reality is that people’s ideas can change or compromise for various reasons (especially as the community grows larger). Because of this, large companies start creating corporate cultures, focusing on internal PR, and gradually embedding their brand spirit and company culture.
In a previous discussion with Tristan on this topic, he jokingly said that many projects that LXDAO felt were related to public goods were supported. However, these projects often only tangentially aligned with core goals and were jokingly referred to as “cyber outsourcing.” Ultimately, they didn’t contribute enough to LXDAO’s core mission (not that there was no benefit at all, but the impact was insufficient).
Connie mentioned that regarding the core mission, the conclusion from earlier discussions was that when it comes to public goods, people should immediately think of LXDAO. Internally, LXDAO should have mechanisms and fertile ground for talent development, and externally, LXDAO should hold an irreplaceable position in the public goods domain.
This mindset is already reflected in the concept of “brand power,” particularly in the phrases “people should immediately think of LXDAO in the public goods space” and “LXDAO holds an irreplaceable position in the public goods space externally.”
We often see companies talk about their core competencies, and these competencies form the foundation of brand power.
Core competencies are part of a brand and serve to reinforce it. Conversely, brand power amplifies the influence of core competencies. They complement each other. Building brand power from core competencies seems logical.
However, two challenges may arise:
First problem: What if there is no direct connection between core competencies and the vision? For example, a soy sauce company’s core competency might be traditional brewing methods, but its vision is to produce PGS fully organic soy sauce.
Second problem: What if there are no core competencies? A soy sauce company that touts traditional brewing can’t wait for its family recipe to become a traditional method before selling soy sauce. They sell soy sauce, and after a hundred years, it becomes known as traditionally brewed (a hundred years ago, they likely had other core competencies).
Unfortunately, these two scenarios are quite common…
Therefore, in many cases, we see companies “create” competencies.
For example, a pet food company wanting to compete with Royal Canin may build a lab, understand how to conduct effective experiments, research how their competitor entered the pet healthcare market, and recruit talent.
Applying this example to LXDAO, we need to think not about what LXDAO’s current core competencies are but rather the reverse.
If we aim for people to “immediately think of LXDAO in the public goods space” and for LXDAO to hold an irreplaceable position externally, what kind of core competencies do we need?
In other words, we must first establish that “being thought of in the public goods space” and “holding an irreplaceable position externally” are our short- to medium-term goals (future discussions on a cyber society can follow). We can then think about what core competencies LXDAO needs to develop to achieve this vision.
This relates to a second issue that I refer to as “creating future core competencies.” Each step builds toward these “future core competencies” until the vision is realized, and the core competencies have also been achieved.
What kind of core competencies do we need?
Should we have prominent public goods experts? A vast knowledge service system for open public goods? Public goods used millions of times? Or perhaps projects derived from core public goods?
We need to think about what kind of core competencies and vision align with this trajectory.
I can’t give a definitive answer. This is something for everyone to discuss. While discussing, we can also think about how these core competencies can be achieved.
What should we do to align with brand power?
Looking back at LXDAO’s many achievements, we have accumulated a number of completed projects, many of which are related to public goods.
However, not all public goods align with the goal of strengthening brand power. As mentioned earlier, the keyword “external PR” is important because external PR is essentially the public image of an organization. It is the public’s perception of LXDAO. Even if we complete hundreds of public goods-related projects, if we don’t appear in the public’s perception, these contributions may build up slowly, but they don’t supply enough energy to the brand.
While considering what we should do to align with brand power, I’m also reflecting on whether the various current groups and projects could potentially become energy to drive brand power.
I believe they could, depending on how we integrate this existing work into our brand power strategy.
For example, take “Brutal Co-learning.” Broadly speaking, brutal co-learning is indeed a type of public good, whether in its methodology or outcomes.
Connie mentioned that brutal co-learning, as a mechanism, can be considered a public good, and the courses and accumulated educational materials are also public goods. Public goods, simply put, are things that anyone can use without competition.
We can discuss this from several angles. First, what is the public’s general understanding of public goods? CC licenses? MIT licenses? Mechanisms that can be publicly applied might technically be public goods, but they could diverge from the public’s perception of what constitutes a public good.
So in this case, aside from brutal co-learning itself, “how to help the public recognize that there are many forms of public goods, including mechanism design” becomes a topic. If people don’t understand that this is a public good, it will be difficult to link brutal co-learning to the goals of brand power.
Another aspect is, of the brutal co-learning projects, which can actually contribute to or strengthen brand power? What can be done to further solidify the brand power impact of this project?
Currently, brutal co-learning contributes to brand power in several ways, such as generating buzz, attracting talent, and accumulating more educational content. Since it is part of the public goods space, it does indeed help lay the groundwork for brand power. As one of LXDAO’s more popular recent projects, finding ways to leverage this project for brand power could make organizational development more efficient.
This issue is open for discussion. For example, we could increase learning around the “public goods” theme or create a project that consolidates the results of each brutal co-learning cohort, visualizing and making them reusable. There are many possibilities, and this article alone cannot cover them all.
“Reusability” holds significant weight in the concept of public goods. Many well-known public goods are famous precisely because of their widespread reuse.
Encouraging the reuse of existing projects could be one solution.
How does Nantang DAO fit into this? Nantang DAO focuses more on environmental and cultural resources as public goods rather than digital ones, positioning it as more of a cyber-utopian experiment.
In terms of positioning, it’s a real public goods project. However, given public perceptions of public goods, combined with the limitations of spreading environmental and cultural resources due to geography, whether in strategy, experience, or location, the concept of “reusability” can be more challenging. Therefore, if a project like this were to contribute to brand power, it might require a different approach. For example, integrating the values and spirit of public goods into the narrative of Nantang DAO (just a suggestion…).
This example illustrates that public goods in different fields contribute to LXDAO
’s brand power in different ways. In other words, the way public goods in different domains contribute to brand power varies depending on the field and its characteristics, and how it’s executed.
Achieving widespread use of public goods
Focusing on promoting the education and values of public goods
Creating a rich ecosystem derived from completed public goods
Supporting the initiation and operation of public goods
It’s not just about the public goods themselves. There are many activities that revolve around “sustainable support for valuable public goods and open-source projects,” and there are many such activities within LXDAO. What we need now is to figure out how to highlight this value.
Do we only focus on things related to brand power?
Of course not!
Many things we’re working on are related to public goods, and each is like adding a brick to this lighthouse, strengthening the internal energy of core competencies, and accumulating “future core competencies.”
Some projects may focus too heavily on brand power and lose their original meaning, while others lean more towards operational strategy. But I think it’s necessary to always have at least one project aligned with brand power at the core, carried out with public recognition and efficiency.
Such projects are like the light on the lighthouse. Even if faint, they must shine brightly, so that those sailing through the vast Web3 ocean can see and recognize it at a glance—that’s LXDAO, no longer drifting aimlessly.
这个一个在治理周会中的议题跟文章，我觉得需要更多人对「品牌力」这个议题提出意见跟看法，因此从Notion上复制一份到论坛上，希望能够获得更多的回应跟讨论。
最后也附上简单记录会议中大家的观点
LXDAO的品牌力
为什么需要品牌力？
全球DAO多如牛毛，很多项目的立意涵盖范围叵大，衍生出一个现象，各家虽然有各自专精部分，但模糊的部分也很多。
对于大众来说，往往很难分辨不同的DAO之间到底有什么不同？你也是公共物品，他也是公共物品，你也是以太坊生态，他也是以太坊生态。
对于内部的人员来说当然里面有很多细化是不同的，但是对外部的人呢？
这牵扯到另一个有趣的现象，Web3相关的入门知识也是多如牛毛，但是在Cikey的调研报告中，有超过一半未深入接触Web3的学生表示，不知道去哪里取得学习内容，这听起来相当矛盾对吧。
但从市场行销的角度看来，当无数的「Web3入门知识」看起来都差不多时，意味着大家都不怎么吸引人。所以重点不在于这些资料够不够简单易懂容易入门，而是这些资料能不能捕获大众的注意力。
「注意力！」
这个词很眼熟，我脑中能想到跟「注意力」有关的两件事情：
- 外公关（对大众执行的公关）
- 品牌力
把外公关特别拎出来有点奇怪，但是在上述的诉求上，外公关跟品牌力都是不可或缺的策略，品牌力是一种辨识度，一种差异性，一种谈到一件事情别人想到的是LXDAO而不是XXXDAO跟LXDAO之类的都在做这个，一种别人谈到LXDAO就想到「我知道，就是那个XXX做的特别好的LXDAO」。
外公关则是不断引起大众去关注这个辨识度，我们可以将外公关看待为促使品牌力发光发热的能源或燃料。
探讨这个品牌力，不仅仅是从运营或是日后成长茁壮的诉求，相反地，品牌力是解决Web3世界的问题的一种可能性，也就是前面提到群众的「注意力」，当注意力提升到一定程度之后，就会有更多群众一接触Web3，想了解Web3，就能被品牌力所建立的注意力给吸引，缩短他们在Web3汪洋中迷惘的时间，能够建立出强大的品牌力，是在这汪洋中竖立一座灯塔，给漂流的人们一道希望，一份追求知识的冲动。
LXDAO的品牌力是什么？
不知道在哪里看到关于一个DAO的文章提到，DAO的起点往往来自一个使命或是愿景，接着你应该让这个愿景跟使命去引导你以及社区。
这听起来挺理想主义的….
但事实是，人的想法会因为各式各样的原因发生转变或是妥协（特别是当人越来越多之后），正因为有这个现象，所以大型企业会开始创造企业文化，开始着重内公关，并同时沉淀在企业文化跟品牌精神上。
之前跟Tristan讨论这个议题时，他开玩笑的说，很多项目LXDAO觉得跟公共物品有关有参予支持了，但这些项目可能只跟核心目标沾到边，一度被戏称赛博外包，最后对LXDAO核心主目标的追求并没有带来够多的助益（不是完全没有，但是沉淀的效果不足。）
Connie提到，就主目标这个问题 之前讨论的结果是：在公共物品领域就能想到 LXDAO，并且 在内有着培养人才的机制和土壤，对外 LXDAO 有着在公共物品领域不可取代的地位。
这个思维实际上已经落实在「品牌力」这个概念上，特别是「在公共物品领域就能想到 LXDAO」跟「对外 LXDAO 有着在公共物品领域不可取代的地位」这两句话上。
我们常常会看到企业提到企业的核心竞争力是什么，这个竞争力沉淀在品牌力上。
核心竞争力本身就是品牌的一部分，是用来强化品牌的，反过来说，品牌力也在放大核心竞争力的影响力，本身是相辅相成，如果从核心竞争力去建立品牌力，听起来非常理所当然。
但可能会面临两个问题：
第一个问题：核心竞争力跟愿景万一没有直接的关联性怎么办？例如有家酱油公司的核心竞争力是古法酿造，但是他的愿景是做PGS全有机的酱油？
第二个问题：万一没有核心竞争力怎么办？一家主打古法酿造的酱油公司，不可能等到自己的祖传秘方变成古法了才开始卖酱油啊，他是卖着卖着过了一百年后变成古法酿造秘方了（一百年前他应该有别的核心竞争力）。
不巧的是这两个现象其实非常常见……
所以从各种案例中更常见到是「造」。
例如宠物饲料公司，想要跟法国皇家竞争市场，当他们需要将品牌力往医疗科学迈进，他们就会去建设实验室，了解实验如何进行才能有效，研究对手是如何进入宠物医疗市场，挖角各种人才等等。
把这个案例套回LXDAO，我们要思考的不是LXDAO的核心竞争力是什么，而是反向的思路。
当我们希望「在公共物品领域就能想到 LXDAO」，「对外 LXDAO 有着在公共物品领域不可取代的地位」，我们需要什么样的核心竞争力？
也就是说，我们要先确定「在公共物品领域就能想到 LXDAO」，「对外 LXDAO 有着在公共物品领域不可取代的地位」是我们的中短期的愿景（赛博社会这个未来讨论….），进一步思考要让LXDAO发展出这个愿景，需要什么样的核心竞争力。
这还牵涉到第二个问题，我愿意称为「创造未来的核心竞争力」，也就是每一步都在持续累积这个「未来核心竞争力」，直到愿景实现时，核心竞争力也跟着实现了。
我们需要什么样的核心竞争力？
有众多的公共物品知名人物成员？有庞大的开放公共物品的知识服务系统？有被使用百万次的公共物品，还是有大量从核心公共物品衍生出来的项目？
我们要思考的是什么样的核心竞争力跟愿景能准确地在同一个路线上
我不敢断言，这个问题可以开放留给大家讨论，讨论的同时，再进一步思考我们需要的核心竞争力，可以如何达成？
做些什么才能契合品牌力
回头检视LXDAO的诸多成果，也累积下不少的成品，其中不少跟公共物品相关的项目。
即便如此，并不是所有的公共物品都符合壮大品牌力的目标，前面提到「外公关」这个关键词还有一个原因，所谓的外公关，简单来说是「组织的公众形象」，也就是外面的大众对于LXDAO的认知，即便我们完成数百件跟公共物品相关的项目，但无法出现在大众的认知里，我们能说这些贡献是一种厚积薄发，但对品牌力本身没法供给足够的能量。
在思考我们应该要做些什么才能契合品牌力的同时，我也再思考，现在运行的诸多小组跟项目，是不是有可能称为推动品牌力的能量呢？
我觉得是可能的，端看我们如何将现有的工作如何细化落实到品牌力上？
以残酷共学来举例，从广义上来说，残酷共学的确是一种公共物品，不管是他的做法还是成果
Connie提过，残酷共学作为一种机制，算是一种公共物品，而且他过程的课程跟累积的教育资料也是一种公共物品。公共物品简单来说就是人人可以使用的，且不会带来竞争的事物。
可以从几个面向来讨论这个问题，首先是大众对于公共物品的认知普遍是什么？CC授权？MIT？可公开应用的一种机制虽然是属于公共物品，但很可能脱离了「大众对于公共物品」的认知。
所以在这件事情上，除了残酷共学本身，「如何让大众认知到原来「公共物品」有各种形态，包括机制设计也是一种」这件事情成了一个课题，毕竟如果大众没有清晰的理解到原来这是一种公共物品，便很难将残酷共学跟品牌力的诉求链接在一起。
另一个面向是，同样是残酷共学，什么样的残酷共学可以沉淀在品牌力或是对品牌力有强大助益？又或者是可以再进一步做些什么来强化这个项目在品牌力上的沉淀？
现有残酷共学对于品牌力的沉淀是什么？更偏向几个个面向，例如适合引发热度，吸引更多人才以及累积更多教育内容等等，基于本身是属于公共物品的一环，在品牌力上的确也有布局上的助益，但身为LXDAO中近期的热门项目，如果能够从中找到推动品牌力的方法，也能让组织发展事半功倍。
这件事情有待大家讨论，例如增加跟「公共物品主题」相关的学习，或是创建一个项目汇整每一个残酷共学的结果，让他可视化，并可以被再次应用，可能性很多，不是我在写文章这会可以想完全的。
「再次应用」这件事情在「公共物品」的概念上是有一定力度，因为许多著名的公共物品之所以著名，大多是因为被「再次应用」的庞大。
让现有项目能够积极的被再次应用，可以是一个方案。
如果用这个逻辑来看南塘DAO又是如何？南塘DAO有更多的层面是脱离了数字公共物品的领域，更偏向是环境资源跟文化资源的公共化，还是一次赛博主义的实验。
从定位来说，是实打实的公共物品项目，但基于大众对于公共物品的认知，加上环境资源跟文化资源的扩散能力受限于地理条件，不管是策略，经验或是场地，在「再次应用」这件事情上也会比较吃力，因此如果要在此类的项目着重助益品牌力的能量，就得换个方向，例如将公共物品的价值与精神融入南塘DAO的叙事中（只是举例……）
但从这个案例也显现了公共物品在不同领域，对于LXDAO的品牌力助益是不一样的，又或者说不同领域的公共物品要产生品牌助益的方式也不同，具体是公共物品中的那个领域，并且具备什么特质，使用什么方法，都会是在这个主题上的课题。
完成公共物品被广泛使用
着重宣导公共物品的教育跟价值
完成的公共物品衍生丰富生态
辅导公共物品的启动及运营
不完全是公共物品本身，能够围绕在「可持续的支持有价值的公共物品和开源项目」这个主题的事情很多，在LXDAO里的也很多，现在我们需要的是用什么方法将这个价值给突显出来。
难道我们只做对品牌力有关的事情？
当然不是！
现在在做的很多事情，只要是跟公共物品相关的，就像是为这座灯塔添砖加瓦一样，是强化核心竞争力的内在能量，也是在累积「未来核心竞争力」。
有些项目可能太过于着重品牌力的部分，反而会失去原本的意义，有些更偏向是运营策略，但是随时有一件以上掐中品牌力核心的项目，以大众认知的积极效率在进行，我觉得是必要的。
这样的项目就像是灯塔上的光，即便再微弱，也要发出光亮，让在Web3汪洋上航行的人一眼就可看到，辨识出来那就是LXDAO，不再随波逐流。
总结：怎么去加强 LXDAO 合作类项目 关于“公共物品”的概念
残酷共学和公共物品的关系？项目如何服务 LXDAO 的品牌力？
Marcus：品牌影响力靠的是一个核心的产品，从 OP RFP 去寻找机会。
Loxia：被社区吸引是因为“良心”，文化符号。良心是实，公共物品是虚。良心和公共物品的融合
Helios：受良心吸引，但因为公共物品的概念才决定加入 LXDAO
xboring：基于良心做一些事情。
Soleil：良心是一个比较好的锚点，可以作为吸引人的锚点。
Ray：良心和公共物品不冲突。LXDAO 会是怎样的组织和社区？良心在国际化上是比较难，公共物品更容易形成共识。不是话语的圈子。
品牌宣传：良心和公共物品的结合
我觉得有个议题可以收集+讨论一下
现在各个项目跟小组，如何让大众对他们跟「良心+公共物品」的链接性更强烈？
“赛博外包”这个词不是我提的