The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Decentralized autonomous organizations – Evolution, challenges, and opportunities
Abstract
A decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) is an emerging entity facilitated through blockchain technology. It operates under the principle of a decentralized governance structure void of hierarchical leadership, and decisions are made based on community consensus. As DAO and its mechanisms are still in an early stage, its potential evolution and future influence on enterprises remain unclear. This work elaborates on this emerging type of organization through a literature review and case studies of DAOs to demonstrate the current state of the art. The findings presented include a brief discussion of the technology that facilitates these organizations. Additionally, advancements and the common characteristics of existing DAOs are presented. Examining current and defunct DAOs revealed the challenges these organizations should address to reach their full potential in future application areas. Finally, it is concluded which organizations and industries could most likely benefit from the DAO concept in future.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
As DAOs scale, their decentralized model can result in slower consensus-building, misaligned strategies, and difficulties in managing diverse participant interests.
“However, as organizations scale, this decentralized model can result in slower consensus-building, misaligned strategies, and difficulties in managing diverse participant interests (Schneider et al., 2022).”
From Adapting Mintzberg’s organizational theory to DeSci: the decentralized science pyramid framework (2024) · cites this paper as Schneider et al., 2022
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Adapting Mintzberg’s organizational theory to DeSci: the decentralized science pyramid framework
Weidener, L., Greilich, K., & Melnykowycz, M. (2024) · Frontiers in Blockchain · doi:10.3389/fbloc.2024.1513885 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Schneider, B., Ballesteros, R., Moriggl, P., & Asprion, P.
- Venue
- Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz FHNW
- Publisher
- Fachhochschule Nordwestschweiz FHNW
- Published
- 2022
- References
- 0
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
