<![CDATA[The emergence of Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) presents a fundamental challenge to the traditional corporate form, which has dominated economic organization for over a century. Built on blockchain technology, DAOs propose a new model for coordinating economic activity. This study addressed the critical question of institutional efficiency by applying the lens of Transaction Cost Economics (TCE) to compare DAOs and traditional corporations. A comparative institutional analysis was conducted using a mixed-methods approach. We employed a multiple case study design, analyzing two representative DAOs and two analogous traditional corporations from Q1 2023 to Q4 2024. Data collection involved the systematic analysis of archival records, including 215 DAO governance proposals and corporate filings, and 32 semi-structured interviews with key participants. A novel analytical framework was developed to categorize transaction costs into ex ante (search, bargaining) and ex post (monitoring, enforcement), further distinguishing between 'on-chain' and 'off-chain' costs. The study revealed significant trade-offs between the two organizational forms. Traditional corporations exhibited high ex ante bargaining costs (legal, negotiation) and ex post monitoring costs (managerial overhead), but benefited from established legal frameworks that reduced enforcement uncertainty. Conversely, DAOs significantly lowered specific transaction costs through automation via smart contracts, particularly in on-chain bargaining and enforcement for codified tasks. However, DAOs incurred substantial, often hidden, new transaction costs related to off-chain social coordination, governance participation, and navigating legal ambiguity. This was termed the 'Governance Overhead Paradox'. In conclusion, DAOs do not represent a universally superior organizational form but rather a new point on an institutional possibility frontier. They are highly efficient for tasks that are global, permissionless, and computationally verifiable. Traditional firms retain advantages in contexts requiring complex, subjective decision-making and legal certainty. The future of the firm is likely not a replacement of one form by the other, but a pluralistic ecosystem where hybrid models emerge.]]>
