Hi Joe -
Collective based treasuries make a lot of sense for the reasons you outline.
However there are two very different ways to look at the context of these collectives - domain based or direction based.
Domain based collectives focus on a loosely defined area with KPIs also ROI to the treasury that is set, reported and assessed via their organisational structures.
Direction based collectives are tightly coupled together with a shared vision, cohesive set of values and focused on a common outcome, where all share in the success, but can flex independently within their own specific project.
The issue with domain based approaches is it inevitably leads to high coordination costs, siloing of intelligence / insights and ultimately wasted spend (see thread related to delegation to ‘experts’ here).
In general a lot of this simplifies when you start with a question of ‘what does the treasury want’?
From a qualitative perspective, it wants successful parachains.
From a quantitative perspective, there need to be some objective measures of success.
Without a way to assess ROI on treasury spends, there is way to steadily focus the strategy and tighten the loops of coordination across collectives.
This also needs to become a self-sustaining system (the treasury is a business after all) - and if we assume we have stablecoins to spend, then there needs to be income returning to the treasuries.
When viewed in this manner, the treasury ultimately requires fee based income to replenish its reserves.
Over time, we can assess the performance of directions, by their return to the treasury.
By splitting Kusama (and Polkadot treasuries) into vertically integrated directions, made up of aligned collectives each creating core ‘components’ within a cohesive operating system, we open the door more strategically aligned to a model that is likely to spit out a full stack propositition in the manner Apple have specialised that bridges both software and hardware… the consumer hardware being the core ‘products’.
You can see across crypto that all blockchains are coalescing around the same issues and insights - the same is true in the eventual stack… the rebranding to NearOS / UrbitOS, EthOS, and the return of blockchain phones etc.
It should be reassuring that the same stages are playing out - the question is just what the new ‘iPod’ will be for crypto…