Most Web3 projects fail, not because of technical issues — but because of structural problems

Long-term Observation of IDN Network

When a Web3 project gradually becomes silent or fails, the most common explanations are often: Poor technology, lack of execution, or “bad luck.”

But if we extend the timeline and enlarge the sample size, a more realistic conclusion emerges:

The vast majority of Web3 projects do not fail primarily due to technical collapse, but because their collaborative structures fail first.

This is the judgment formed by IDN Network through long-term industry observation.

1. Technology can often still run, but collaboration has already stopped

In many failed projects, the underlying code still functions, and the blockchain has not halted. What truly changes are the relationships of collaboration between people.

Common structural issues include:

Disconnection between contribution and reward

Decision-making processes becoming opaque

Blurred boundaries of authority and responsibility

Declining trust among participants

Once the collaborative structure loosens, no matter how stable the technology remains, the ecosystem’s vitality cannot be preserved.

Web3 is fundamentally not just a technical system, but a multi-party collaboration system.

2. “Community” is not a substitute for structure

Many projects place hope in “community consensus,” believing that as long as the atmosphere is good enough, structural issues can be ignored.

But in reality, emotions are unstable.

Without clear definitions of:

Who is responsible for what

Who can make decisions

How to measure effective contributions

What long-term participation means

The so-called community can easily disintegrate quickly when expectations are inconsistent.

IDN Network prefers to establish a structure first, then discuss community.

3. Incentive mechanisms cannot compensate for fuzzy structures

When collaboration problems occur, many projects’ first response is “adding incentives.”

In the short term, this can indeed boost data; but in the long run, it introduces greater uncertainty:

Participation becomes highly conditional

Contributors start waiting for the next round of incentive adjustments

Rules change frequently, expectations are constantly broken

Eventually, participation is no longer a long-term choice but a short-term game.

In IDN Network’s view, incentives should reinforce the structure, not mask structural flaws.

4. Truly sustainable systems reduce the need for “repeated realignment”

An important feature of a strong system is: not needing to frequently “re-explain the rules.”

When the structure is clear, participants naturally understand:

Their roles

Behavioral boundaries

Long-term reward logic

Collaboration no longer relies on repeated mobilization but becomes a rational choice.

This is also why IDN Network pays more attention to the internal consistency of the structure.

Conclusion

The long-term challenge of Web3 is not whether technology can continue to innovate, but whether decentralized systems can support long-term, rational, multi-party collaboration.

Technology enables the system to operate, but the structure determines whether the system can survive.

For IDN Network, building Web3 means prioritizing solving “how to collaborate,” not just “what functions to develop.”