Home » Steve Blank’s Corner (Page 6)

  • How to Build a Billion Dollar Startup

    Originally posted on April 19, 2012 at www.steveblank.com

    The quickest way to create a billion dollar company is to take basic human socialneeds and figure out how to mediate them on-line.

    (Look at the first wave of the web/mobile/cloud that have done just that:  Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Match.com, Pandora, Zynga, WordPress, LinkedIn.)

    It’s your turn.

    Hard-wired
    This week I’m in New York teaching a 5-day version of my Lean LaunchPad class at Columbia University.  While the class teaches a process to search and validate a business model, it does not offer any hints on how to create a killer startup idea.  So after several hundred teams in the last few years, one of my students finally asked this question – “So how do we come up with an idea for the next billion dollar company?”

    Is It a Problem or a Need?
    I’ve now come to believe that the value proposition in a business model (value proposition is the fancy name for your product or service) fits into either one of two categories:

    • It solves a problem and gets a job done for a consumer or a company (accounting software, elevators, air-conditioning, electricity, tablet computers, electric toothbrushes, airplanes, email software, etc. )
    • Or it fulfills a fundamental human social need (friendship, dating, sex, entertainment, art, communication, blogs, confession, networking, gambling, religion, etc.)

    Moving Needs to Bits = a billion dollars
    Friendship, dating, sex, art, entertainment, communication, confession, networking, gambling, religion – would our hearts still beat and would our lungs still breathe without them?  Of course.  But these are things that make us human. They are hard-wired into our psyche. We’ve been doing them for ten’s of thousands of years.

    Ironically, the emergence of the digital world  has made us more efficient yet has left us with less time for face-to-face interaction. Yet it’s these interactions that define our humanity.

    Facebook takes our need for friendship and attempts to recreate that connection on-line.

    Twitter allows us to share and communicate in real time.

    Zynga allows us to mindlessly entertain ourselves on-line.

    Match.com allows us to find a spouse.

    At the same time these social applications are moving on-line, digital platforms (tablets and smartphones) are becoming available to hundreds of millions. It’s not hard to imagine that in a decade, the majority of people on our planet will have 24/7 access to these applications. For better or worse social applications are the ones that will reach billions of users.

    Yet they are all only less than 5-years old.

    It cannot be that today we have optimally recreated and moved our all social interactions on-line.

    It cannot be that Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pandora, Zynga, LinkedIn are the pinnacle of social software.

    Others will do better.

    Others will discover the other unmet and unfilled social needs that can move on-line.

    It could be you.

    Lessons Learned

    • Value propositions come in two forms: they solve a problem or they fulfill a human social need
    • Social Needs are friendship, dating, sex, entertainment, art, communication, blogs, confession, networking, gambling, religion, etc.
    • They have always been fulfilled face-to-face
    • They are now moving on-line
    • The market size for these applications equals the entire human race
    • These are the ultimate applications
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Blinded by the Light — The Epiphany

    Originally posted on April 3, 2012 at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    Epiphany e·piph·a·ny  noun /iˈpifənē/
    A moment of sudden revelation or insight

    We now know how to teach entrepreneurs how to think about business models and use to turn hypotheses into facts. But there is no process to teach how to get an epiphany. We can only try to create the conditions where this might occur.

    ————-

    It All Just Came to Me In a Flash
    Luis, one of the CEO’s from our first National Science Foundation class, came in to speak to our next class. We had a couple of minutes to catch up between sessions and the conversation got strangely awkward when I asked him how their startup was going.

    “I’m kind of embarrassed to tell you, but we dumped the entire business idea and are doing something else” he said, avoiding eye contact.  “Oh, you pivoted when your team analyzed customer feedback?” I said as I grabbed some coffee.  He looked uncomfortable. “No, I was standing in the shower when it just hit me that our nano-materials should be used for something completely different. I didn’t change a few components, I changed all of them.”

    I guess my jaw dropped a bit because Luis just continued. “I’m feeling guilty because I was using Customer Development and the Startup Owners Manual until I had that insight. But there was nothing in your book that prepared me for what just clicked in my head. I just saw our entire new business model in a flash, all of it at once. I’m now having the company execute on what came to me in the shower. A small part of me is confused whether I’m doing the right thing, but mostly I’m just convinced it’s as right as anything I’ve ever done. But there’s no chapter in your book or anyone else’s on this.”

    Realizing what I was hearing, I pulled Luis outside the conference room into the quiet of the hall. “Luis, did this ever happen to you before?” I asked.  “Well no, not in a startup, this stuff is new to me.” “No, I replied. “I mean in your lab. Did you ever have this feeling where it all just came to you? He thought for a bit as he stared in the distance and then responded, “Yeah, I never thought about that until now, but in fact I did. It felt a lot like when I was writing my thesis five years ago.  I had struggled with the data for two years. Then one weekend I went for a walk by the ocean to clear my head — and I had an insight that won me the fellowship. I had to spend six more months checking the data and working my tail off, but my thesis was awarded best paper of the year.”

    I tried to stay calm as I realized what I was hearing.  “Luis, you need to pay attention to me very carefully. You just had an epiphany. If you’re lucky you may have a few more in your career. But while epiphanies are extremely rare, they are immensely important and need to be listened to. What you had was no accident. You were collecting enormous amounts of data on one side of your brain, but it was the other side that recognized the pattern. No one knows if epiphanies are always right, but people who follow them tend to get rich, famous or both.”

    Epiphany Equals Insight
    For thousands of years, every culture has had words to describe what happened to Luis: a flash of insight, an epiphany, strategic intuition, a revelation, etc. An epiphany is a different way of solving problems than the problem solving we do every day. In an epiphany, you see the entire answer to a complex problem without realizing you were even consciously thinking about it (very different from a snap answer or a quick response.)  We hear stories in almost every field, in art, science and business, about how “the idea just came to me.”

    The Customer Development process was a result of an Epiphany I had when writing my memoirs. After 80 pages, I realized in one instant that the stories I had been recounting weren’t of interest (at least to anyone besides me), but the pattern behind the stories had much deeper meaning. Years later, the key ideas in the Startup Owners Manual came to me in the same way – realizing that startups are a search for a Business Model, and that the Business Model Canvas was the organizing principle for Customer Development. All of these insights came fully formed.

    Getting Ready For the Epiphany
    While we can describe an epiphany, we don’t know how to teach it or make it happen. But we do know how to set up the conditions for it to occur.

    First interact with lots of people — the more they are different from you with different ideas, and different perspectives the better. (Getting out of the building in the Customer Development process guarantees you’ll do just that.) Next, attack whatever problem you’re working on head-on. In Customer Development that means building a set of business model hypotheses, and running customer discovery to test those hypotheses.  Most of the time you’ll be slogging through a ton of data operating in chaos trying to figure out what direction to take your company.

    Here’s the part that’s counterintuitive – on a regular basis make time to take an hour, or even a day to do something completely different. Go for a hike or a drive. Walk around the city. Don’t distract yourself with something that makes you focus (the movies, TV, email or the net.)  Instead, shut it all down and do something that’s relaxing and gives the problem solving part of your brain a rest – let the pattern recognition side take over.

    It can be challenging for an entrepreneur to slow down, disengage from the relentless pace and smell the roses.  But making this kind of time for your right brain to process what your left-brain has learned can bring you insights you’d never uncover otherwise.  You can’t force an epiphany but when it comes, you’ll know it.

    You’ll be blinded by the light.

    Lesson Learned

    • An Epiphany is a moment of sudden revelation or insight
    • Epiphanies cannot be planned or scheduled
    • They require a constant stream of data, from multiple sources
    • An Epiphany is a pattern recognition moment
    • Often they match a pattern from a different industry or field
    • They happen when you disengage from execution
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Nail the Customer Development Manifesto to the Wall

    Originally posted on March 29, 2012 at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    When Bob Dorf and I wrote the Startup Owners Manual we listed a series of principles. I thought they might be worth enumerating here:

    A Startup Is a Temporary Organization Designed to Search
    for A
     Repeatable and Scalable 

    1. There Are No Facts Inside Your Building, So Get Outside
    2. Pair Customer Development with Agile Development
    3. Failure is an Integral Part of the Search for the Business Model
    4. If You’re Afraid to Fail You’re Destined to Do So
    5. Iterations and Pivots are Driven by Insight
    6. Validate Your Hypotheses with Experiments
    7. Success Begins with Buy-In from Investors and Co-Founders
    8. No Business Plan Survives First Contact with Customers
    9. Not All Are Alike
    10. Startup Metrics are Different from Existing Companies
    11. Agree on Market Type – It Changes Everything
    12. Fast, Fearless Decision-Making, Cycle Time, Speed and Tempo
    13. If it’s not About Passion, You’re Dead the Day You Opened your Doors
    14. Startup Titles and Functions Are Very Different from a Company’s
    15. Preserve Cash While Searching. After It’s Found, Spend
    16. Communicate and Share Learning
    17. Startups Demand Comfort with Chaos and Uncertainty
    Quite a few people have asked for a way to remember these without having to dig through the book.  So by popular demand, here’s a poster of the Customer Development Manifesto.  You can order a copy here.
    Nail it to your wall.
    Nail the Manifesto to your Wall
    Get your own Poster here:http://sblank.com/HpwmuN
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  •  
  • The National Science Foundation Innovation Corps — What America Does Best

    Originally posted March 26, 2012, at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    We ran the first National Science Foundation Innovation Corps class October to December 2011.

    63 scientists and engineers in 21 teams made ~2,000 customer calls in 10 weeks, turning laboratory ideas into formidable . 19 of the 21 teams are moving forward in commercializing their .

    Watching the final presentations it was clear that  the results were way past our initial expectations (comments from mentors as well as pre- and post-class survey data suggested that most of the teams learned more in two months than others had in two years.) So much so that the NSF decided to scale the Corps program.

    In 2012 the NSF will put 150 teams of the best scientists in the U.S. through the Lean Launchpad class.  And to help teach these many teams, the NSF will recruit other universities that have engineering programs to become part of the network.

    Congressman Lipinski Gets It
    In-between the 2011 pilot class and the first NSF class of 2012, I got a call fromCongressman Dan Lipinski. He sits on the House committee that oversees the NSF - the Science, Space and Technology committee (a place where his engineering degree and PhD comes in handy.) He had read my blog posts about the NSF Innovation Corps and was interested in how the first class went. He wanted to fly out to and sit in the class about to start in the engineering school.

    While I’ve had visitors in my classes before, having a congressman was a first. He showed up with no press in-tow, no entourage, just a genuine search for understanding of whether this program was a waste of taxpayer money or good for the country.

    He asked tough questions about why the government not private capital should be doing this. I explained that the goal of the Innovation Corps was to bridge what the NSF calls the “ditch of death” – the gap between when NSF research funding runs out and when a team is credible enough (with enough customer and market knowledge) to raise private capital or license/partner with existing companies. The goal was not to replace private capital but to help attract it. The amount of money spent on the Innovation Corps would be about 1/4 of one percent of the $7.373 billion NSF budget, but it would leverage the tens of billions basic research dollars already invested. It’s payoff would be disproportionately large for the country. It’s one of the best investments this country can make for keeping the U.S. competitive and creating jobs.

    After class the Congressman joined the team at our favorite pizza place for our weekly post-class debrief.

    If you like science, technology or entrepreneurship, this guy is the real deal. He gets it.

    “Innovation, jobs and entrepreneurship” have become popular buzzwords in an election year. But it was pretty amazing to see a congressman jump on a plane to actually find out if he can help the country do so.  He issued this press release asking Congress to fully fund the Innovation Corps when he came back to Washington.

    The National Science Foundation Innovation Corps combines the best of what the U.S. government, American researchers in academia and risk capital can do together. If we’re correct, we can compress the time for commercializing scientific breakthroughs and reduce the early stage risks of these new ventures. This means more jobs, new industries and a permanent edge for innovation in the United States.

    ———

    The 3-person teams consisted of Principal Investigators (PI’s), mostly tenured professors (average age of 45,) whose NSF research the project was based on. The PI’s in turn selected one of their graduate students (average age of 30,) as the entrepreneurial lead. The PI and Entrepreneurial Lead were supported by a mentor (average age of 50,) with industry/startup experience.

    This was most definitely not the hoodie and flip-flop crowd.

    Part one of the posts on the NSF Innovation Corps is here, part two here. Syllabus for the class is here.  Textbook is here.

    Here are some of the final Lessons Learned presentations and team videos:

    Akara Solutions: Flexible, Low Cost Cooling Technology for LED Lighting
    Principal Investigator: Satish Kandlikar Rochester Institute of Technology

    Arka Solutions Final Video

    Arka Solutions Final Video

    If you can’t see the video above, click here.

    To see the presentation, click here.

    Semiconductor-Based Hydrogen and Hydrocarbon Sensors
    Principal Investigator: Lisa Porter Carnegie-Mellon University

    SensSevere Movie

    SensSevere iCorps Movie

    If you can’t see the video above, click here.

    The presentation is here.

    Pilot Production Of Large Area Uniform Single-Crystal Graphene Films
    Principal Investigator: Alan Johnson University of Pennsylvania

    Graphene I-Corps Movie

    Graphene I-Corps Movie

    If you can’t see the video above, click here.

    To see the presentation, click here.

    Radiotracer Synthesis Commercialization
    Principal Investigator: Stephen DiMagno University of Nebraska-Lincoln

    Ground Flour Pharma iCorp

    Ground Flour Pharma iCorp

    If you can’t see the video above click here.

    See the presentation here.

    Commercialization of an Engineered Pyrolysis Blanket for the Conversion of Forestry Residues to Soil Amendments and Energy Products
    Principal Investigator: Daniel Schwartz University of Washington

    Carbon Cultures Final NSF I-Corps Video

    Carbon Cultures Final NSF I-Corps Video

    If you can’t see the video above, click here

    The presentation can be seen here.

    Photocatalysts for water remediation
    Principal Investigator: Pelagia Gouma SUNY at Stony Brook

    photocatalyst NSF I-Corps Video

    photocatalyst NSF I-Corps Video

    If you can’t see the video above, click here.

    See the presentation  here.

    The other teams were equally interesting. Here are links to their Lessons Learned presentations.

    IDecideFast – A web-based application for effective decision making for the layperson
    Principal Investigator: Ali Abbas University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

    Silicon Terahertz Electronics
    Principal Investigator: Michael Shur  Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

    Standoff detection of explosives using novel signal-amplifying nanocomposite and hand-held UV light
    Principal Investigator: Yu Lei University of Connecticut

    MEMS-based drug infusion pumps
    Principal Investigator: Ellis Meng University of Southern California

    TexCone – Laser-Generated Surface Textures for Anti-Icing and Sun-Light-Trapping Applications
    Principal Investigator: Mool Gupta University of Virginia

    Concentric Technology
    Principal Investigator: Walter Besio University of Rhode Island

    Hand-Held Tonometer for Transpalpebral Intraocular Pressure Measurement
    Principal Investigator:  Eniko Enikov University of Arizona

    Artificial Membrane-based Ion Channel Screening
    Principal Investigator: Jacob Schmidt University of California-Los Angeles

    Privacy-Preserving Location Based Services
    Principal Investigator: Nan Zhang   George Washington University

    MySkinTone: A breakthrough technology and product for skin melanin evaluation
    Principal Investigator: Michael Silevitch Northeastern University

    Mobidemics: Using Mobile Gaming for Healthcare
    Principal Investigator: Nilanjan Banerjee University of Arkansas

    SmartMenu
    Principal Investigator: Elizabeth Mynatt ([email protected]); Georgia Tech Research Corporation

    Sweet Sensors – Portable sensors using widely available personal glucose monitor
    Principal Investigator: Yi Lu University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

    SwiftVax – A Green Manufacturing Platform for Faster, Cheaper, and Scalable Vaccine Manufacturing
    Principal Investigator: Karen McDonald University of California-Davis

    Lessons Learned

    • Yes, entrepreneurship can be taught
    • No, there’s no age limit
    • We now know how to reduce customer and market risk for new ventures
    • The combination of government, researchers in academia and risk capital make a powerful accelerator for technology commercialization
    • There’s at least one congressman who understands it
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Stanford 2012 Lean LaunchPad Presentations — Part 2 of 2

    Originally posted March 14, 2011, at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    Today, the second half of the Engineering Lean LaunchPad Class gave their final presentations. Here are the final four (the first five are here.)

    Team ParkPoint Capital
    This team spoke face-to-face with 326 customers. As often happens, this team came into class convinced that their market research proved that their business was providing credit to underbanked customers.  8 weeks later they ended up as a financial service provider for immigrants.  Lots of learning and pivots on the way.

    To see the slide presentation, click here.

    The ParkPoint Capital customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    We thought the team summarized their lessons learned well:

    Team DentalOptics
    Team DentalOptics spoke face-to-face with 72 customers.  Their journey was from a lighting solution for dentists to an automated way to test for periodontal disease. How they got to their destination was truly amazing.

    See the slide presentation here.

    The DentalOptics customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    Team MiCasa
    They spoke to 105 customers and surveyed 98 more.

    You can watch as this team pivots through Customer Segments by clicking through their canvases at the end of presentation. It is the first film-strip of in action.

    To see the slide presentation, click here.

    The MiCasa customer discovery narrative blog is here

    Team ZiiLion
    Interviewed 154 customers in China plus surveyed another 48.

    This team was trying to do something extremely difficult. Create an app for Renren (a Chinese version of Facebook) for event planning.  And do it while in school in the U.S.  Lots of learning and Pivots here.

    The slide presentation is here.

    The Ziilion customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    ———

    Congratulations to all the teams.  They taught us a lot.

    Stanford e245 2012 class photo

    Next week the class will be taught to 25 teams for the National Science Foundation Innovation Corps. And later in the week we’ll be sharing what we learned with other entrepreneurial educators it at the NCIIA conference. Then in April we’ll be Corporate Entrepreneurship at Columbia University.

    Lessons Learned

    • Class is a mix of engineering students and MBA’s
    • Students apply as preformed teams
    • Application to the class is the teams business model canvas
    • Curriculum = business model canvas +
    • Minimal lecture, maximum experiential immersion
    • Relentless customer visits (10-20 a week)
    • On-line journal to document their customer discovery narrative
    • One mentor (VC or experienced entrepreneur) per team
    • Mandatory office hours
    • Weekly in-class presentations for all teams
    • Weekly critiques of team customer discovery progress
    • Workshop on how to present a story-arc and narrative
    • Lean LaunchPad teaching guide
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Stanford 2012 Lean LaunchPad Presentations — Part 1 of 2

    Originally posted on March 7, 2012 at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    Today, the first half of the Engineering Lean LaunchPad Class gave their final presentations. Here are the first five.

    It Feels Like 20 Years Ago Today
    It’s hard to believe it’s only been a year since we taught the first 10 teams in the Stanford Lean LaunchPad class. To share what we learned, we blogged each of those class sessions, (all the slides can be found here.)  Since then we’ve taught an additional 50 teams: 21 teams for the National Science Foundation (NSF) Innovation Corps, 11 teams for a joint Berkeley/Columbia MBA class, another 9 for a Berkeley MBA/Engineering class, and now 9 more teams in this Stanford Engineering Lean LaunchPad Class class.

    Later this month, the next 25 National Science Foundation Innovation Corps teams will show up – but this time with reinforcements. The NSF has selected the best teams from two major universities and they will be joining the class. The goal is for them is to observe this class, then host and teach the next round of50 NSF scientist/engineer teams in July.  The process will repeat itself, quarter by quarter – new students, new University entrepreneurship teaching teams.

    We’ll teach over 175 NSF Corps teams in the Lean LaunchPad course in 2012. While at the same time spreading the Lean LaunchPad entrepreneurship curriculum to campuses across the United States.

    The 2012 Stanford Lean LaunchPad Presentations
    The class is intensely and deliberately experiential to develop the mindset, reflexes, agility and resilience an entrepreneur needs to search for certainty in a chaotic world. Students were going to get a hands-on experience in how to start a new company. The premise of the class is that , are not about executing a plan where the product, customers, channel are known. Startups are in fact only temporary organizations, organized to search–not execute–for a scalable and repeatable .

    Yet this isn’t an incubator. We trying to teach students a methodology that combines customer development, agile development, business models and pivots. (The slides and syllabus here describe the details of the class.) Our goal is to teach them the art, science and strategy of entrepreneurship that will forever change how they view early stage ventures.

    And do it in 8 weeks.

    Team EngineKites
    A kite-boarding startup? Only in California! This team spoke face-to-face with 50+ end users, 3 manufacturers, 25 potential partners, 22 domain experts and surveyed an additional 115 customers. And they got to the beach a lot. Don’t miss their video of the product below.

    To see the slide presentation, click here.

    To see the video, click here

    The EngineKites customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    Team Sync
    Team Sync spoke face-to-face with 74 customers, 10 experts and surveyed another 103 customers.

    View the slide presentation here.

    The Sync customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    Team Nudge/Dynamo
    This team won the award for the most pivots in the class. They had face-to-face interviews with 252 customers + 10 partner interviews + 76 surveyed.

    Loved the “evolution” slide

    To see the slide presentation, click here.

    The Nudge/Dyanmo customer discovery narrative blog is here

    Team GameSpeed
    These guys hold the record for the number of customers touched 4,000!  147 face-to-face or phone interviews.

    To see the slide presentation, click here.

    The GameSpeed customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    Team ColorWheels
    This team was trying to solve a hard problem – getting girls engaged in science and engineering. They spoke to 294 people: 69 parents, 110 kids, 6 high school girls 32 experts, 6 manufacturers, and surveyed an addtional 68 parents.

    View the presentation here.

    The ColorWheels customer discovery narrative blog is here.

    We Got Smarter Too
    One of the great things about the class is that the curriculum is evolving as fast as the teams are learning. As a teaching team we’ve learned a ton of how to best select teams, so we now insist that they come in as preformed teams. We hold mixers a month or two in advance to help facilitate the process. It has made a dramatic difference in team efficiency and cohesion

    We have the students formally apply for the class by filling out a business model canvas. And at the first class they introduce themselves and their teams by presenting the canvas. This moved the learning up by one entire class session since we can now hit the ground running.

    Given how important the students work in customer discovery outside the building was, we made each team keep an online journal on each step of their progress. Since the teaching team read each of their narrative before class and office hours, it made their in-class presentations short and efficient.

    We realized that students needed help turning all that they were learning from customers into a coherent and crisp presentation. So we offered a special evening workshop on how to present a story-arc and narrative.

    We’ve been experimenting in other ways – trying to figure out how to “bubble-up” some of the customer discovery data onto the canvas with red/yellow/green dots you see on some of the business model canvas slides. We suggested that teams talk about their hypothesis tests, draw diagrams of product flows through the channel and let us know who the customer segment is with a “customer archetype” slide.

    We’re about to move our class text to The Startup Owner’s Manual and put together a draft of a standard Lean LaunchPad teaching guide.

    Finally, we’ve been paring the lectures back to the absolute minimum to impart the information necessary for the teams to move forward, but leaving more time for us to provide feedback and critique of their weekly presentations. We’re actively considering running an experiment of making the lectures an on-line homework requirement (with on-line quizzes to make sure they view the material.)

    None of this would be possible without the two VC’s who volunteer their time to teach this Stanford class with me: Jon Feiber of Mohr Davidow Ventures and Ann Miura-ko ofFloodgate,

    And we had the help of Lisa Forssell, director of technical artists from Pixar, who taught the “how to present class” and Thomas Haymore our indefatigable Teaching Assistant and our team of mentors.

    And hats off to Kathy Eisenhardt and Tom Byers of the Stanford Technology Ventures Program who gave us the freedom to invent and teach the class.

    —–

    The rest of the teams present next week.  We’ll post their slides in part 2.

    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  •  
  • Search versus Execute

    Originally posted March 5, 2012, at www.steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    One of the confusing things to , investors and educators is the relationship between and design and business planning and execution.

    When does a new venture focus on customer development and business models? And when do business planning and execution come into play?

    Here’s an attempt to put this all in context.

    Don’t Throw the Tomatoes
    I was in Washington D.C. last week presenting at the ARPA-E conference. I spent the next day working with the National Science Foundation on the Innovation Corps, and talking to congressional staffs about how entrepreneurial educational programs can reshape our economy. (And I even found time to go to the Spy Museum.)

    One of the issues that came up is whether the new lexicon of entrepreneurial ideas – Customer Development, Business Model DesignLeanLean LaunchPad class, etc. – replace all the tools and classes that are currently being taught in curriculums and business schools.  I was a bit surprised since most of what I’ve been advocating is complementary to existing courses. However, I realize I’ve primarily written about business model design and customer development. Given that I’m speaking this month in front of educators at the NCIIA conference, I thought I should put it in context before they throw tomatoes at me.

    Search Versus Execution
    One of the things have lacked is a definition of who they were. For years we’ve treated like they are just smaller versions of a large company. However, we now know that a startup is a temporary organization designed to search for a repeatable and scalable business model.  Within this definition, a startup can be a new venture or it can be a new division or business unit in an existing company.

    If your business model is unknown – that is just a set of untested hypotheses- you are a startup searching for a repeatable business model. Once your business model (market, customers, features, channels, pricing, Get/Keep/Grow strategy, etc.) isknown, you will be executing it. Search versus execution is what differentiates a new venture from an existing business unit.

    Strategy


    The primary objective of a startup is to validate its business model hypotheses (and iterate and pivot until it does.) Then it moves into execution mode. It’s at this point the business needs an operating plan, financial forecasts and other well-understood management tools.

    Process

    The processes used to organize and implement the search for the business model areCustomer Development and Agile Development. A search for a business model can be in any new business – in a brand new startup new or in a new division of an existing company.

    In search, you want a process designed to be dynamic, so you work with a rough business model description knowing it will change. The model changes because startups use customer development to run experiments to test the hypotheses that make up the model. And most of the time these experiments fail. Search embraces failure as a natural part of the startup process. Unlike existing companies that fire executives when they fail to match a plan, we keep the founders and change the model.

    Once a company has found a business model (it knows its market, customers, product/service, channel, pricing, etc.), the organization moves from search to execution.

    The product execution process – managing the lifecycle of existing products and the launch of follow-on products – is the job of the product management and engineering organizations. It results in a linear process where you make a plan and refine it into detail. The more granularity you add to a plan, the better people can execute it: aBusiness Requirement document (BRD) leads to a Market Requirements Document (MRD) and then gets handed off to engineering as a Functional Specifications Document (FSD) implemented via Agile or Waterfall development.

    Organization

    Searching for a business model requires a different organization than the one used to execute a plan. Searching requires the company to be organized around a customer development team led by the founders. In contrast, execution, (which follows search) requires the company to be organized by function (product management, sales, marketing, business development, etc.)

    Companies in execution suffer from a “fear of failure culture“, (quite understandable since they were hired to execute a known job spec.) Startups with Customer Development Teams have a “learning and discovery” culture for search. The fear of making a move before the last detail is nailed down is one of the biggest problems existing companies have when they need to learn how to search.

    The idea of not having a functional organization until the organization has found a proven business model is one of the hardest things for new startups to grasp. There are no sales, marketing or business development departments when you are searching for a business model.  If you’ve organized your startup with those departments, you are not really doing customer development.  (It’s like trying to implement a startup using Waterfall engineering.)

    Education
    Entrepreneurship curriculums are only a few decades old. First taught as electives and now part of core business school curriculums, the field is still struggling to escape from the bounds of the business plan-centric view that startups are “smaller versions of a large company.” VC’s who’ve watched as no startup business plan survived first contact with customers continue to insist that startups write business plans as the price of entry to venture funding. Even as many of the best VCs understand that thebusiness ‘planning’ and not the ‘plan’ itself, are what is important.

    The trouble is that over time – this key message has gotten lost. As business school professors, many of whom lack venture experience, studied how VCs made decisions, they observed the apparently central role of the business plan and proceeded to make the plan [not the planning], the central framework for entrepreneurship. As new generations of VCs with MBA’s came into the business, they compounded the problem (“that’s how we always done it” or “that’s what I learned (or the senior partners learned) in business school.”)

    Entrepreneurship educators have realized that plan-centric curriculum may get by for teaching incremental but they’re not turning out students prepared for the realities of building new ventures. Educators are now beginning to build their own E-School curriculum with a new class of management tools built around “search and discovery.” Business Model Design, Product/Service Development, Customer Development, Startup Team-Building, Entrepreneurial Finance, Marketing, Founder Transition, etc. all provide the startup equivalent of the management tools MBAs learn for execution.

    Instructional Strategy

    Entrepreneurial education is also changing the focus of the class experience fromcase method to hands-on experience. Invented at Harvard, the case method approach assumes that knowledge is gained when students actively participate in a discussion of a situation that may be faced by decision makers.

    The search for a repeatable business model for a new product or service is not a predictable pattern. An entrepreneur must start with the belief that all her assumptions are simply hypotheses that will undoubtedly be challenged by what she learns from customers. Analyzing a case in the classroom removed from the realities of chaos and conflicting customer responses adds little to an entrepreneur’s knowledge. Cases can’t be replicated because the world of a startup too chaotic and complicated. The case method is the antithesis of how entrepreneurs build startups – it teaches pattern recognition tools for the wrong patterns –  and therefore has limited value as an entrepreneurship teaching tool.

    The replacement for cases are not better cases written for startups. Instead, it would be business model design – using the business model canvas as a way to 1) capture andvisualize the evolution of business learning in a company, and 2) see what patternsmatch real world iterations and pivots. It is a tool that better matches the real-world search for the business model.

    An entrepreneurial curriculum obviously will have some core classes based on theory, lecture and mentorship. There’s embarrassing little research on entrepreneurship education and outcomes, but we do know that students learn best when they can connect with the material in a hands-on way – personally making the mistakes and learning from them directly.

    As much as possible the emphasis ought to be on experiential, learner-centric and inquiry-based classes that help to develop the mindset, reflexes, agility and resilience an entrepreneur needs to search for certainty in a chaotic world.

    Lessons Learned

    • The search for the business model is the front end of the startup process
    • This is true in the smallest startup or largest company
    • The goal is to find a repeatable/scalable model, and then execute
    • Execution requires operating plans and financial forecasts
    • Customer and Agile Development are the processes to search and build the model
    • Product management is the process for executing the model
    • Entrepreneurial education needs to develop its own management stack
      • Starting with how to design and search for a business model
      • Adding all the other skills startups needs
      • The case-method is the antitheses of an entrepreneurial teaching method
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Killing Your Startup by Listening to Customers

    Originally posted at www.steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    The art of and the science of is not just getting out of the building and listening to prospective customers. It’s understandingwho to listen to and why.

    Five Cups of Coffee
    I got a call from Satish, one of my ex-students last week. He got my attention when he said, “following your customer development stuff is making my company fail.” The rest of the conversation sounded too confusing for me to figure out over the phone, so I invited him out to the ranch to chat.

    When he arrived, Satish sounded like he had 5 cups of coffee. Normally when I have students over, we’d sit in the house and we’d look at the fields trying to catch a glimpse of a bobcat hunting.  But in this case, I suggested we take a hike out to Potato Patch pond.

    Potato Patch Pond
    We took the trail behind the house down the hill, through the forest, and emerged into the bright sun in the lower valley. (Like many parts of the ranch this valley has its own micro-climate and today was one of those days when it was ten degrees warmer than up at the house.)

    As we walked up the valley Satish kept up a running dialog catching me up on six years of family, classmates and how he started his consumer web company. It had recently rained and about every 50 feet we’d see another 3″ salamander ambling across the trail. When the valley dead-ended in the canyon, we climbed 30-foot up a set of stairs and emerged looking at the water. A “hanging pond” is always a surprise to visitors. All of a sudden Satish’s stream of words slowed to a trickle and just stopped. He stood at the end of the small dock for a while taking it all in. I dragged him away and we followed the trail through the woods, around the pond, through the shadows of the trees.

    As we circled the pond I tried to both keep my eyes on the dirt trail while glancing sideways for pond turtles and red-legged frogs. When I’m out here alone it’s quiet enough to hear the wind through the trees, and after awhile the sound of your own heartbeat. We sat on the bench staring across the water, with the only noise coming from ducks tracing patterns on the flat water. Sitting there Satish described his experience.

    We Did Everything Customers Asked For
    “We did every thing you said, we got out of the building and talked to potential customers. We surveyed a ton of them online, ran A/B tests, brought a segment of those who used the product in-house for face-to-face meetings. ” Yep, sounds good.

    “Next, we built a minimum viable product.”  Ok, still sounds good.

    “And then we built everything our prospective customers asked for.”  That took me aback. Everything?  I asked?  “Yes, we added all their feature requests and we priced the product just like they requested.  We had a ton of people come to our website and a healthy number actually activated.”  That’s great I said, “but what’s your pricing model?’  ”Freemium,” came the reply.

    Oh, oh. I bet I knew the answer to the next question, but I asked it anyway.  “So, what’s the problem?”

    “Well everyone uses the product for awhile, but no one is upgrading to our paid product. We spent all this time building what customers asked for. And now most of the early users have stopped coming back.”

    I looked at hard at Satish trying to remember where he had sat in my class.  Then I asked, “Satish, what’s your ?

    What’s your business model?
    “Business model?  I guess I was just trying to get as many people to my site as I could and make them happy. Then I thought I could charge them for something later and sell advertising based on the users I had.”

    I pushed a bit harder.

    “Your strategy counted on a freemium-to-paid upgrade path. What experiments did you run that convinced you that this was the right pricing tactic? Your attrition numbers mean users weren’t engaged with the product. What did you do about it?”

    “Did you think you were trying to get large networks of engaged users that can disrupt big markets? Large” is usually measured in millions of users. What experiments did you run that convinced you could get to that scale?”

    I realized by the look in his eyes that none of this was making sense. “Well I got out of the building and listened to customers.”

    The wind was picking up over the pond so I suggested we start walking.

    We stopped at the overlook a top of the waterfall, after the recent rain I had to shout over the noise of the rushing water. I offered that it sounded like he had done a great job listening to customers. And better, he had translated what he had heard into experiments and tests to acquire more users and get a higher percentage of those to activate.

    But he was missing the bigger picture. The idea of the tests he ran wasn’t just to get data – it was to getinsight.  All of those activities – talking to customers, A/B testing, etc. needed to fit into his business model –how his company will find a repeatable and scalable business model and ultimately make money.  And this is the step he had missed.

    Customer Development = The pursuit of customer understanding
    Part of Customer Development is understanding which customers make sense for your business.  The goal of listening to customers is not please every one of them.  It’s to figure out which customer segment served his needs – both short and long term. And giving your product away, as he was discovering, is often a going out of business strategy.

    The work he had done acquiring and activating customers were just one part of the entire buisness model.

    As we started the long climb up the driveway, I suggested his fix might be simpler than he thought.  He needed to start thinking about what a repeatable and scalable business model looked like.

    I offered that getting acquiring users and then making money by finding payersassumed a multi-sided market (users/payers). But a freemium model assumed a single-sided market – one where the users became the payers.

    He really needed to think through his Revenue Model (the strategy his company uses to generate cash from each customer segment). And how was he going to use Pricing, (the tactics of what he charged in each customer segment) to achieve that Revenue Model.  Freemium was just one of many tactics. Single or multi-sided market? And which customers did he want to help him get there?

    My guess was that he was going to end up firing a bunch of his customers – and that was OK.

    As we sat back in the living room, I gave him a copy of The Startup Owners Manual and we watched a bobcat catch a gopher.

    Lessons Learned

    • Getting out of the building is a great first step
    • Listening to potential customers is even better
    • Getting users to visit your site and try your product feels great
    • Your job is not to make every possible customer happy
    • Pick the customer segments and pricing tactics that drive your business model
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  • Who Dares Wins — 2nd Annual Int’l Business Model Competition

    Originally posted on February 16, 2012 at steveblank.com

    By Steve Blank

    Alexander Osterwalder and I spent last week in Salt Lake City, Utah as judges at the 2nd Annual International Business Model Competition, hosted by Professor Nathan Furr, and his team at the BYU Center for Entrepreneurship.

    The idea of a competition first emerged when I realized that Business Plan writing ought to be taught in English Departments – as they’re the best example of creative writing will ever do.

    The Business Plan 
- a roadmap for execution
    When venture capital teamed up with entrepreneurs in the 1960’s they brought with them the canonical MBA planning tool – the business plan.

    The business plan is a wonderful document for organizing and planning for existing companies to launch follow-on products. In an existing corporation, the business plan is the execution document for sustaining .

    The problem is that once a plan is written it’s static and assumes minimal new learning. This makes sense in a company where your customers, channel and competition are known. And your revenue plan is something more than a hallucination.  But for , business plans fail to match the chaotic reality they encounter in the real world. Yet year after year, decade after decade, VC’s would watch as no startup business plan survived first contact with customers. So what did the venture industry do? They kept insisting startups write business plans as the price of entry to venture funding.

    Why?

    VC’s thought of startups as smaller versions of large companies.  Large companies wrote business plans, so VC’s made startups write business plans.  Large companies had VP’s of Sales and Marketing, so VC’s made startups organize that way as well. Large companies executed plans well and when they didn’t work, they fired the executives who screwed up.  So VC’s assumed that startups should equally unfold per the plan – firing executives when reality intruded.

    The reality is that startups needed a new class of management tools. Tools to help them manage the search for a repeatable and scalable business model. Startups needed tools to help them organize their hypotheses, and then needed a process to rapidly test those hypotheses. And they needed tools that recognized that most startups go from failure to failure as they searched for, and discovered, product/market fit. And that instead of firing executives to match a plan, it was the plan itself that needed to rapidly iterate.

    Business Plan vs. Business Model +  
    The term business model first appeared ~50 years ago, but the concept didn’t catch onuntil the 1990’s. It wasn’t until 2010 when Alexander Osterwalder published his bookBusiness Model Generation that it became clear that this was the tool to organize startup hypotheses.

    It wasn’t long before Alexander and I realized that organizing hypotheses with his canvas was just the first step in building a business. The next step was getting out of the building and testing the business model in a formal process – and that process isCustomer Development.

    We’ve blogged about the combined methodologies here and here.  Our LeanLaunchPad class at Stanford, Berkeley, Columbia and the National Science Foundation teach the combined Business Model Canvas + Customer Development tools.  My new book, The Startup Owners Manual integrates the two.

    Three years ago, after watching my nth business plan competition I realized this was simply wrong.  Rather than having students invest months writing a 100-page tome and polishing slides that taught them almost nothing about what it was really like to build a company, I thought there had to be a better way.

    I suggested that we hold competitions that actually emulated the real world (rather than what’s easy to grade) and hold competitions that emulate what entrepreneurs actually encounter – chaos, uncertainty and unknowns. A business model competition would emulate the “out of the building” experience of real entrepreneurs executing the customer development / business model / agile development stack.

    You can write a business plan slide deck in your dorm or library.  But you can’t fake a business model/customer development presentation. It takes a ton of face-face customer interactions.

    The International Business Model Competition
    From the seed of this initial idea Professor Nathan Furr at BYU did the hard work and created a global business model competition, this year receiving over 100 submissions. The finals were held in the packed 1,000 seat BYU auditorium with lines of students outside unable to get in.

    (I love walking around the BYU campus. It feels like being at a giant Eagle Scoutconvention.)

    It was an eye-opener to see each of the teams take the stage to describe their journey in trying to validate each of the 9 parts of a business model, rather than the static theory of a business plan.

    Each team used the business model canvas and customer development stack to go from initial hypotheses, getting outside the building to validate their ideas with customers, and going through multiple pivots to find a validated business model.

    All of the Business Model finalists were pretty amazing.   Each one of these presentations moved the teams closer to building a real company.

    This years winner were:

    1. XoomPark, BYU

    The XoomPark team spoke to over 300 people (customers and channel partners,) ended up with 2 partners, 30 parking lot customers, a working website and a validated revenue model.
    To see the slides, click here.
    2. Excelegrade, Harvard

    The Excelegrade team was relentless in hypothesis testing.

    To see the slide deck, click here.

    3. AutoBid, BYU

    AutoBid’s pivots were pure artistry.

    To see the slide deck, click here.

    4. FlexLeg, BYU 

    FlexLeg got to experience first-hand the complexity of a multi-sided market – something the Business Model Canvas illustrates with startling clarity.

    To see the slide deck, click here.

    Business Plan competitions are for those want to write PowerPoint slides. Business Model competitions are for entrepreneurs who want to learn how to build companies. Harvard will be hosting the 2013 International Business Model Competition and in 2014.

    Come join us.

    Lessons Learned

    • Business Plan competitions offer VC’s a PowerPoint beauty contest.
    • They teach entrepreneurs little about how to build a company.
    • You can’t fake a Business Model/Customer Development presentation.
    • It tough, grueling and relentless, requiring a ton of face-face customer interactions.
    • It what winners do.
    Share:
    Twitter
    HackerNews
    Technorati
    Facebook
    Google Buzz
    LinkedIn
    Digg
    del.icio.us
    Reddit
    StumbleUpon
    RSS

    Continue reading »

  •  
 
 

FounderLY Photos

			FounderLY posted a photo:				FounderLY posted a photo:				FounderLY posted a photo:				FounderLY posted a photo:				FounderLY posted a photo:				FounderLY posted a photo:
Used tag: steveblank

Press Mentions #1

Press Mentions #2