A Decision Making Tool for Decentralized Autonomous Organization

탈중앙화된 자율 조직 의사결정을 위한 도구

  • 이요셉 (단국대학교 컴퓨터학과) ;
  • 박용범 (단국대학교 소프트웨어학과)
  • Received : 2020.04.16
  • Accepted : 2020.06.11
  • Published : 2020.06.30


Blockchain enabled Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO), a new form of organization with conveying its core value - trust. Token holders who are participating DAO's governance share their thoughts, information, and ideas in online forum. But it is problem that chronological form of DAO's online forum makes token holders hard to find crucial information, meaning that many of them might not understand what is happening discussion. In this paper, we studied not only a decision making process which feature is iteration, visualization, and applicable to DAO with 6 steps in total but also a decision making tool which is based on the process of this paper. The tool has features to help participants such as voting model, visualization features which gives guidance to them for their decision during the process. Our experiment showed that the process and tool is somewhat reasonable, and the information during the process is effective for participants. This work is expected to be applied to current DAOs to make a decision among the token holders.



본 연구는 과학기술정보통신부 및 정보통신기획평가원의 대학ICT연구센터지원사업의 연구결과로 수행되었음(IITP-2020-2017-0-01628).


  1. NAKAMOTO, Satoshi. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Manubot, 2019.
  2. PUTHAL, Deepak, et al. Everything you wanted to know about the blockchain: Its promise, components, processes, and problems. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 2018, 7.4: 6-14 https://doi.org/10.1109/mce.2018.2816299
  3. CACHIN, Christian. Architecture of the hyperledger blockchain fabric. In: Workshop on distributed cryptocurrencies and consensus ledgers. 2016. p. 4.
  4. BROWN, Richard Gendal, et al. Corda: an introduction. R3 CEV, August, 2016, 1: 15.
  5. DUPONT, Quinn. Experiments in algorithmic governance: A history and ethnography of "The DAO," a failed decentralized autonomous organization. In: Bitcoin and Beyond (Open Access). Routledge, 2017. p. 157-177.
  6. MakerDAO whitepaper, "https://makerdao.com/ko/whitepaper/", [Accessed 18th December, 2019].
  7. DigixDAO whitepaper, "https://digix.global/whitepaper.pdf", [Accessed 18th December, 2019].
  8. HERRING, Susan C. Interactional coherence in CMC. In: Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers. IEEE, 1999. p. 13 pp.
  9. BUDER, Jurgen, et al. Selective reading of large online forum discussions: The impact of rating visualizations on navigation and learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 2015, 44: 191-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.043
  10. SAATY, Thomas L. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International journal of services sciences, 2008, 1.1: 83-98. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSSCI.2008.017590
  11. SAATY, Thomas L. Analytic network process. Springer US, 2013.
  12. SAATY, Thomas L. Group decision making and the AHP. In: The analytic hierarchy process. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1989. p. 59-67.
  13. VAN DE, Andrew; DELBECQ, Andre L. Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision-making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 1971, 14.2: 203-212. https://doi.org/10.2307/255307
  14. SHIRANI, Ashraf; AIKEN, Milam; PAOLILLO, Joseph GP. Group decision support systems and incentive structures. Information & Management, 1998, 33.5: 231-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00029-9
  15. PALOMARES, Ivan; MARTINEZ, Luis; HERRERA, Francisco. A consensus model to detect and manage noncooperative behaviors in large-scale group decision making. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 2013, 22.3: 516-530. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2013.2262769
  16. DigixDAO governance guide, "https://ipfs.infura.io/ipfs/QmXg8UNeoStwFc561QzRedkpXJRZAnwikobRydjw3CDem9", [Accessed 18th December, 2019].
  17. PARK, Jung-Won; PORT, Daniel; BOEHM, Barry. Supporting distributed collaborative prioritization. In: Proceedings Sixth Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (ASPEC'99)(Cat. No. PR00509). IEEE, 1999. p. 560-563.
  18. PARK, Jung-Won, et al. Supporting distributed collaborative prioritization for WinWin requirements capture and negotiations. In: Proceedings of World Multiconference on Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics. 1999. p. 578-584.
  19. DISALVO, Carl, et al. Making public things: how HCI design can express matters of concern. In: Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, 2014. p. 2397-2406.
  20. CHOI, Dong-Bin; JO, In-su; PARK, Yong B. Taxation Analysis Using Machine Learning. Journal of the Semiconductor & Display Technology, 2019, 18.2: 73-77.