The 300 Framework: The tl;dr

Want the formal proofs? See: Full Academic Paper


The Problem in One Sentence

Organizations either stay small and cohesive or grow big and become a mess. There’s no middle ground.

The Solution

Cap it at 300 people. But make those 300 work like 3,000.

The Structure

Six Domain Circles (50 people each)

CircleWhat They Do
PatronsFund stuff, show up for events, VIP access
MediaCreate content, manage channels, tell the story
AcademicsWrite papers, validate claims, academic cred
Initiative LeadersRun projects, manage launches, make stuff happen
AmplifiersShare content, recruit members, spread the word
InfrastructureBuild systems, maintain tech, keep lights on

Three Commitment Tiers

TierCommitmentWhat They Get
ShieldsShow up occasionallyAccess, community, voting on some stuff
SpearsRegular participationMore access, priority for opportunities
PhalanxAll in, core teamDecision-making power, revenue share

The Ask Matrix

When a project needs something, the Ask Matrix matches:

  • What skills are needed
  • Who has those skills
  • Who’s available
  • Who’s in the right commitment tier

It’s like a dating app for project staffing.

Crown vs. Blessing

  • Crown = Governance (who decides)
  • Blessing = Economics (who gets paid)

You can have Blessing without Crown (investor with no vote) or Crown without Blessing (advisor with no equity). Most systems conflate these. We don’t.

Why 300?

Robin Dunbar says humans can maintain about 150 stable relationships. Double that for an organization where not everyone needs to know everyone. Beyond 300, you need bureaucracy. At 300, you can still function on trust and reputation.

The Wry Part

Every startup says they’re “flat” and “collaborative” until they hit 50 people and realize someone has to decide who gets the good parking spot.

We just built the parking spot allocation into the operating system from day one.


Next: The Boaz Principle — how to build generosity into math instead of marketing