I participated in the recent governance workshops in Las Vegas. For transparency, IO invited me and covered part of my expenses. This is my personal experience and feedback on the event facilitation/process - less so about the overall outcomes and what was discussed specifically.
The workshops spanned two days, covering various governance-related topics. Facilitation was provided by IO and several community members. Participation was diverse roles in the Cardano ecosystem, including blockchain partners, SPOs, DReps, CF, Emurgo, and others. Overall, representation across stakeholders was strong.
Day 1
We began by using structured problem-definition techniques, such as the “5 Whys,” to explore topics including economic KPIs, the constitution, on-chain vs. off-chain processes, parameters, rewards, and participation.
As someone with Lean Enterprise Certification and a manufacturing background, I appreciated seeing familiar continuous-improvement tools applied here. Over time, discussions converged on related themes, and we prioritized accordingly.
Facilitation primarily focused on keeping participants in a problem-identification mindset rather than jumping into solutions. While this worked for the intended outcome, I would have preferred a more structured affinity mapping process to organically identify and prioritize discussion areas, rather than relying solely on preselected topics from IO. Nevertheless, Day 1 felt productive and set a solid foundation for the rest of the workshop.
Day 2
The second day was more challenging due to changes in format, faster pacing, and a narrower focus. The main topic—Budget Process—was a high-interest area for participants, though discussions around executive functions were less engaging for many. Still, some of the larger governance issues identified on Day 1 connected to this theme.
While doing the review of the past year and the budget process one distraction came up which was trying to put a dollar amount on the hours worked across multiple entities. The key that should have been focused on was just the time, however putting a value to it in an attempt to raise more awareness only served to invite scrutiny and criticisms, which distracted from the overall point - last year took a lot out of everyone. Outside of that, monetary value on time and work mean and costs different things across the globe - we should be mindful of that. Time, however, is always measured the same.
Time constraints limited the depth of facilitation. In my view, we did not explore root causes thoroughly or apply the same structured breakdown of challenges as on Day 1. This reduced opportunities for broader group discussion, which—if paired with the right tools—could have led to richer outcomes.
Use of AI Feedback Processing
A new approach was introduced: participants submitted Google feedback forms, which were aggregated using AI to identify top priorities. The group then voted, discussed context, and voted again for confirmation. The AI results aligned closely with overall sentiment, but bypassed some of the organic, human-driven dialogue that can surface unexpected insights.
While the intent was to save time, this process may have also removed opportunities for valuable discussion. Moving forward, we should refine the balance between AI efficiency and human deliberation.
Overall Impression:
The workshops achieved their core objectives, with strong representation and productive initial sessions. Day 1 demonstrated the value of structured facilitation, while Day 2 highlighted the risks of shifting formats and reducing discussion time. There is clear potential to refine the process—particularly by blending structured facilitation with participant-driven topic discovery and ensuring AI tools complement, rather than replace, organic dialogue.
I’d also like to see more talk and open discussions around our current governance model and where we’re going. Every decision we make to change the structure has an outcome that either marches us down a path of something new and decentralized, or we start to mimic paths we’ve seen taken in history that lead up to governance models in place today that people did not want or sign up for.
I look forward to opportunities to participate again in the future.
