After that, I met with @tangle and @Neiltbe to discuss how we can help Sushi find the perfect person for the Head Chef position.
Subsequently, we hope you agree that we have identified two excellent candidates. We believe both have the necessary skills and talent to become a high-performing Head Chef for Sushi to drive the project to new heights of success.
I’d assume this commission would come out of their candidate’s salary. Also it seems like an agreement between them and their prospective candidate to sort out. Not sure why Sushi would need to be involved in this. I think @JiroOno mentioned Sushi would pay $10k to anyone bringing in a new Chef so maybe that’d be payable from the Sushi coffers?
If your candidates choose to honor your agreement to give you 30% of their salary then it would make sense for them to handle that matter. It seems like a steep cut, hopefully they signed something for your sake.
Also how do I get your job? Anybody looking for work feel free to DM me and I’ll do some google searching for 30% of your wages.
In all seriousness though, if you did send these candidates to us and they didn’t just see Sushi’s marketing team’s campaign, well done! They seem excellent. Much respect.
Thank you for your reply, our fee would be due in addition to the candidate’s salary, and went over everything with some of the team running the process before being allowed to submit candidates, thank you for your kind words regarding the candidates we have put forward. I noticed recently that Jared proposed (off his own back- that he’d be happy to publicly renounce his severance back to the treasury if elected - Head Chef Finale - Proposed Timelines - #4 by jaredgrey)
Typically, executive search firms charge the employer between 25 - 33% of the estimated total annual compensation a candidate is expected to receive in their first year in the position, so we’re actually pretty competitive in this regard. The web3 industry as a whole is extremely understaffed, underexperienced and oddly competitive even at community management levels, let alone for CEO candidates.
We truly want Sushi to succeed, and that’s why we’ve presented two excellent candidates who’ve come from reliable hard work that we’ve put in to find, vet, and work with them to deliver people who we believe will bring Sushi’s success to new heights, and naturally we, the same as any other service look to remunerate ourselves for the great work we do and not impact the CEO level candidate’s expectations of their own salary for an exceptionally challenging but exciting new role
Feels like this is something we should have considered a month or two ago. But we have several nominated candidates we’re choosing from in the very near future. Great to have this info for the future, but not sure we need it at the moment.
Also, the link to one of your candidates above doesn’t work.
To clarify then, does this mean Sushi would be looking to pay out 30% of the base salary of $500k? So $150k to CBR if one of their candidates is chosen? Or does the 30% apply to the Sushi the Head Chef would receive as well?
The Sushi Team should probably be highlighting this extra cost in the snapshots for the candidates it’s applicable to going forward to ensure DAO voters are aware of this potential additional expense going forward, yes/no? @JiroOno , @ImSoftware@Neiltbe , @Tangle ?
It wasn’t agreed to as of yet in the latest Snapshot which indicated a cost of $500k as the base salary. Unless it is intended that those candidate’s base salary will be reduced by that $150k to make that vote sufficient.
True, but both of my candidates because they are fantastic human beings, have offered to forego their severance package (valued at $250k) if elected and more, finding great people and people who have Sushi’s best interests at heart as well as able to deliver is where we excel, and I think this is clear from their unwaivering commitment to the cause shown here - so whilst I appreciate our fee can seem like it’s an extra expense, we’re actually bring more mutual benefit to the DAO but putting great people who can offer things like this because their hearts are in the right place - so the net benefit is actually +$100k to Sushi when you take account of the candidates foregoing of the severance package and our fee
While I agree they’re both excellent candidates and am not trying to fault them. Optimistically no Head Chef candidate would really be exercising the severance package in the first place. I think most would agree that the likelihood that the right candidate for the role would utilize the severance package would be improbable. I think it is a far stretch to call this a net gain of 100k for Sushi’s coffers.
I think it is reasonable to expect that this additional cost is indicated in Snapshots since it goes above the $500k voted on and not all voters regularly frequent all forum posts. That was why I suggested it.
Jared and I have both agreed to forego the severance package and I have suggested a very simple package: base pay and token award (already voted on) and nothing more. I would hope the other three candidates will agree so you will not need a vote. The upside for all is a rising token price which I believe I can deliver by focussing on Sushi’s key mission - being the best AMM.
This feels strange - introducing a recruiter’s fee, late in the process after introducing 2/5 of the qualified candidates. I do not have an issue with using a recruiter, would have wished it was more transparent.
Recruiting can be good and leads to strong candidates - but it is expensive
It seems you spoke with the Sushi team before introducing these two candidates.
What is next? Are we as token-holders required to vote on this fee? Is the fee automatically deducted?
Seems harmful to introduce this information this late, especially as they are still up for consideration.
If the decision is to either go with the two that will cost the DAO an extra 30% of the salary ($150k), or the other three that don’t, the choice feels pretty obvious.
An update to our proposal, we’re delighted that our candidate Jared Grey was selected. We’ve been asked to update our proposal by @Neiltbe and @Tangle and now the matter of our remuneration is to be discussed.
We’ll be joining an AMA next week where we’ll introduce ourselves, and talk about the relationship moving forward between CB Recruitment and Sushi with our founder David Lamb who will be taking part.
We have some ideas about what our remuneration package should look like, equally we’re keen to engage with the community, so that whatever is decided is something we can all agree upon.
Our regular fee for an assignment of this magnitude would be $150k paid in USDC. However, as a gesture of good faith, we are prepared to reduce our fee to $100k and propose the following pay structures;
-$50k USDC + $50k Sushi Tokens paid immediately after a DAO vote
-$50k USDC paid immediately after a DAO Vote + $50k Sushi Tokens (at today’s price) paid 1 year after @jaredgrey start date (assuming he is still in post)
-$50k USDC paid immediately + $50k USDC paid 1 year after @jaredgrey start date assuming he’s still in post
To remind the community, Jared has already returned the potential severance package to the sushi treasury, and so Jared’s success means success for everyone in the community, while if for any reason he is unsuccessful, the treasury has made a significant saving.
We are delighted to have been able to assist with the Head Chef recruitment process, and after such a unanimous choice (11m/15m) we are prepared to structure our deal based on the success of Jared over the next calendar year. Moving forward, we are keen to continue to add value to Sushi’s recruitment process by introducing industry leaders and hope that this is the first introduction of a long and fruitful relationship.
I appreciate your willingness to reduce your fee. However, I do take pause on providing any fee because learning of the talent finders fee was provided to the DAO so late. Most of us had no idea your team had provided two candidates until well into the nomination process.
It doesn’t feel appropriate or ethical to request fees as some form of “trojan horse” right before an election took place. Certainly, I’d be more than happy to consider your finders’ fee for any forthcoming talent.
As a matter of business, if I were the one operating this business, I’d say this feels like we didn’t have adequate notice to make a decision as to whether we’d be compensating a broker.
With that said, references to a “gesture of good faith” falls flat for me. The good faith would have been being transparent from the beginning of the process. In the same vein, it appears you are not prepared to take no compensation, which puts the community in a bad position. Whereas, I expect we’d like to be a community of ethical business practices, this puts us in a position of having to pay a fee of which we had limited to no prior knowledge.
well if you want to start your own from scratch i will pitch in, tbh sushi at present looks slightly better than shiba. sushi have given things but i dont know if anyone uses them. so many NDA and patents and IP all of which DO NOT BELONG IN FREE INTERNET. i would like to vote on a proposal for a dao that bars people that sign stupid ndas from leadership roles. all of which i have described have done nothing to advance anything but fuel envy and greed. i wonder how much hookers and cocaine was had form the backs of shiba purchasers lol
Thanks for coming along today everyone, we really appreciate the opportunity to speak on our proposal and look forward to interacting with the community to move forward over the next week before we raise the proposal formally with the team
We welcome any proposal or way of structuring our fee that the community would like to suggest, and genuinely want the community to be involved in making suggestions around our proposed remuneration, Jared won’t get to decide, the community will in a snapshot vote.
We’re here and on TG on @lambmaster and @jaywongcb if anyone wants to reach out, and will reply to any questions here as soon as we can - and welcome any advice/recommendations on how the community would like to see our proposal structured in the upcoming snapshot.
We’ll move ahead to finalising different options for the snapshot based on what we’ve already presented here above by the end of the week if there are no further questions or recommendations from the community here