Shared Strength – Ecosystem Research (RFC)

Hey friends,

I’ve been exploring an idea for a research project focused on relational intelligence and pattern-tracking within our ecosystem. The goal is to surface our current assets, unmet needs, hidden capacities, and opportunities for deeper mutual support.

I’d love to:

  1. Hear your thoughts, reflections, or questions on the concept
  2. Get a quick signal if you’d be open to a short interview or conversation

More details below :point_down:

Core Purpose

  • Guide resource allocation: Help stewards and funders channel time, capital, and attention toward high-leverage areas.
    • Needs vs. production capacity (tools, communications, housing, etc.)
    • Waste or surplus in systems (e.g., idle labor, unused land)
    • Import substitution opportunities (what are people purchasing from outside that could be made in the network?)
    • Consumer frustrations (with costs, ethics, quality, or availability)
  • Catalyze regenerative matchmaking: Align surplus with need, dormant resources with active intentions.
  • Illuminate the ecosystem’s invisible scaffolding: Map not only who is contributing what, but how those contributions interrelate and compound value.
  • Demonstrate collective resilience: Tell a data-backed story of how shared governance and reciprocity create a durable impact.

Report Components

Section Description
Network Map of Contributors Visual map showing active individuals/orgs, their roles, affiliations, and regional/geographic placement.
Asset Inventory Time, expertise, tools, funding, influence, platforms, content, IP, or access. Self-reported + verified by peers.
Needs & Friction Points Where contributors need support: tech capacity, facilitation, funding, visibility, etc.
Strength Signals Key indicators of network health (e.g., number of cross-pollinated initiatives, feedback loops, governance activity).
Flow Patterns How value moves—funding, knowledge, trust, leadership, or co-creation—from one node to another.
Matchmaking Recommendations Auto- or peer-generated connection suggestions based on shared values and complementary needs.

:hammer_and_wrench: Tools & Methods

  • Community surveys or focus groups
  • Data mining from public records (e.g., agriculture or energy use)
    • Tagging system for assets and intentions (skills, capital, needs, geographies, regenerative goals).
  • Interviews with local businesses, NGOs, or community orgs
  • Mapping networks of production/consumption to spot gaps (via tools like Kumu, Metamaps, or Coordinape).
  • Periodic self-assessments or check-ins using a lightweight survey (e.g., Airtable, Typeform, or DAO-native tool).
  • Layered data viz dashboards that track evolution over time (e.g., number of funded ideas, emergent leadership, inter-org collaboration).

:arrows_counterclockwise: Integration with Ecosystem Dynamics

  • Feedback Loops: The report becomes a living, evolving tool—updated quarterly or seasonally, embedded into governance rhythms.
  • Governance Input: Stewards and angels can use report findings to guide voting, funding, or initiative prioritization.
  • Funding Strategy: Angels/impact orgs can identify areas where their unique assets unlock exponential value.
  • Cultural Rituals: Use the report as a storytelling anchor during seasonal gatherings or retrospective summits.

:bulb: Example Use Case

An angel identifies a pattern where multiple stewards cite “tool-building support” as a gap. The Shared Strength Report shows 3 angels with underused developer teams. The system proposes a co-funded open-source tool sprint, matching unmet needs with hidden surplus, creating value across the board.

4 Likes

Thanks @MaxSemenchuk

Interesting concept - the asset inventory and matchmaking elements could provide value for resource allocation decisions.

It would be good to see a small-scale proof of concept—maybe mapping a subset of contributors to test your methodology.