Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Stanford Engineering 245 syllabus, 2016

2,961 views

Published on

business model canvas, customer development, lean launchpad, stanford, steve blank, syllabus

Published in: Education

Stanford Engineering 245 syllabus, 2016

  1. 1. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 1 of 47 Course: MS&E 297 Hacking For Defense (H4D): Solving National Security issues with the Lean Launchpad Instructors: Tom Byers, Joe Felter, Pete Newell, Steve Blank CA’s: Kim Chang, Ben Etringer, Ben Kohlman, John Deniston, Chris DiOrio, Location: Thornton 110 Days: Tuesdays March 29th – May 31st Times: 4:30 - 7:20 pm Office Hours: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1t_Hq9rRV11bKl44BnwVVVmDYd brkEHn9dXiz04HTqnQ/edit?usp=sharing Webpage: http://hacking4defense.stanford.edu Texts: Business Model Generation: Osterwalder, et al Value Proposition Design: Osterwalder, et al Startup Owner’s Manual: Blank & Dorf Talking to Humans: Constable & Rimalovski Lectures: http://www.udacity.com/view#Course/ep245/CourseRev/1 Prerequisite: Passion in discovering how to innovate at speed Goal: Hands-on experience in understanding, and working with the Defense (DOD) and Intelligence Community (IC) on actual current problems Note: 1. All team members need to be present in class on March 29th for the team to be enrolled in the class (unless previously excused) 2. Teams need to interview 10 customers before the first class 3. Teams need to present their first MVP in the first class 4. Read the Intellectual Property section of the FAQ
  2. 2. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 2 of 47 Week Team Presentation Lecture Topic March 29th Mission Model Canvas Lecture 1 Mission Model, Cust Development, Beneficiaries (Steve, Joe, Tom, & Pete) April 4th 7- 8:30 pm Workshop Intro to DOD (Pete & Jackie) What’s a Minimal Viable Product April 5th Beneficiaries Lecture 2 Value Proposition (Steve/Pete) April 12th Value Proposition Lecture 3 Product/Market Fit (Pete/Jackie) April 19th Product/Market Fit Lecture 4 Deployment (Pete: Lauren/Jackie) April 26th Deployment Lecture 5 Buy-in & Support (Pete: Matt/Bill - NSA) May 3rd Buy-in & Support Lecture 6 Mission Achievement (Joe: Military Fellows) May 10th Mission Achievement Lecture 7 Activities and Resources (Pete: Guest) May 17th Activities and Resources Lecture 8 Partners and Mission Costs (Pete: Guest) May 24th Partners and Mission Costs, Draft Final LLP Lecture 9 Reflections (Steve and Tom) May 31st Lessons Learned Amount of Work Teams have reported up to 10-15 hours of work each week. Getting out of the classroom is what the effort is about. If you can’t commit the time to talk to customers, this class is not for you. Teams are expected to have completed at least 10 in person or Video TeleConference interviews each week focused in the business model canvas area of emphasis for that week. Only Project Given the amount of work this class entails, there is no way you can do the work while participating in multiple startups. A condition of admission to the class was that this is the only startup you are working on this quarter. Shared Materials Your weekly presentations and final Lessons Learned presentations will be shared and visible to others. We may be videotaping and sharing many of the class sessions. Your Workin this Class is Open Sourced Anything you develop during this class (software, hardware, ideas, etc.) is open-sourced. Deliverables Meaningful customer discovery requires the development of a minimum viable product (MVP). Therefore, each team will deliver: 1. Product
  3. 3. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 3 of 47 a. Teams building a physical product must show us a bill of materials cost and a prototype. b. Teams building a web product must build the site, create demand and have customers using it. c. Teams building a mobile product are expected to have working code and have customers using it. 2. Your weekly blog narrative is an integral part of your deliverables. It’s how we measure your progress. 3. Your team will present a weekly in-class 8-minute summary of progress Class Culture This class pushes many people past their comfort zone. If you believe that the role of your instructors is to praise in public and criticize in private, do not take this class. You will be receiving critiques in front of your peers every week. See Appendix B for details
  4. 4. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 4 of 47 Grading Criteria This course is team-based and 85% of your grade will come from your team progress and final project. Your peers will also grade your contribution to your team. The grading criteria are broken down as follows: 15% Individual participation in class. You will be giving feedback to your peers. 30% Out-of-the-building progress as measured by blog write-ups and presentations each week. Team members must: 1) update mission model canvas weekly 2) identify which team member did which portion of the work. 3) detailed report on what the team did each week 4) weekly email of team member participation 25% The team weekly “lesson learned” presentation (see weekly syllabus for weekly content requirement and format) 30% - The team final presentation (see Appendix for format) This total score is multiplied by a “peer grading multiplier” as assigned to you by your team at the end of the quarter.
  5. 5. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 5 of 47 Pre-class preparation Teams are expected to hit the ground running. We assume you and your team have come prepared having read the assigned materials, watched the online lectures, and prepared a set of at least 10 customer contacts to call on in the first week to support the first week of customer discovery. We expect you to have: 1. Spoken to your DOD/IC mentor 2. Introduced yourself to your local mentor 3. Received 10 customers names from them 4. Began Customer Discovery with these first 10 customers before the start of the class 5. Map out the first hypotheses you want to test and develop and present your first MVP on day one of the class 6. Cleared your schedule to attend the “How to Work with the DOD/IC Community” workshop to be held April 4, 7-8:30 PM at the GSB, room G101 Reading/ Viewing Assignment for the first class Read the Harvard Business Review Article: ● Why the Lean Startup Changes Everything: https://hbr.org/2013/05/why-the-lean-start-up-changes-everything/ar/1 Read the Hacking for Defense Blog Posts ● Hacking for Defense – making the world a safer place: http://steveblank.com/2016/01/26/hacking-for-defense-stanford/ Review the Mission Model Canvas ● Read about the business model canvas for background understanding: http://businessmodelgeneration.com/canvas/bmc ● The Mission Model Canvas http://steveblank.com/2016/02/23/the-mission-model-canvas-an-adapted-business- model-canvas-for-mission-driven-organizations/ ● Read: BMG: pp. 14-49 [Loc 275 – 823] The 9 Building Blocks of the Canvas. pp 77-87 [Loc 1049 – 1204] multisided platforms, pp 134-142 [Loc 1801 – 2003] Ideation, pp 200-211[Loc 2970 – 3169] business model environment ● Watch online lessons 1 and 1.5b Review the Value Proposition Canvas ● Read about it and download it here: http://www.businessmodelgeneration.com/canvas/vpc
  6. 6. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 6 of 47 Review Customer Development ● Watch online lesson 2: Customer Development ● Read: SOM: pp. 1-75 [Loc 384 – 1447] intro to customer development and discovery, market size, pp. 76-81 [Loc 1448 - 1537]value proposition and MVP, pp 112-122 [Loc 1964 – 2120] market type, pp. 123-124 [Loc 2144 – 2158] competitors, pp 189-199 [Loc 2998 – 3138] getting out of the building/experiments/contacts, pp 472 [Loc 6982] market size, pp. 473-475 [Loc 7009 – 7068] product features checklist pp. 487 [Loc 7275] Contacts checklist ● Review: Talking to Humans: Constable & Rimalovski ● Talk to 10 customers and use what you learn to complete your mission model canvas ● Record the customer interviews in your blog ● Use search tools and look for potential competitors and prior work done
  7. 7. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 7 of 47 Class 1 March29th Team Presentation: MissionModel Canvas Lecture: Beneficiaries Team Presentation for today’s March 29th class - Mission Model 8 minutes each (all teams) Slide 1 Title slide ● Team name, team members/roles, support team (liaisons, tech mentors, problems sponsors) ● Number of customers spoken to this week ● Total number spoken to ● Three sentence description what the team does and why should sponsor care Slide 2 Show us the team ● Details for this first week only Slide 3 Minimal Viable Product ● Show us your MVP of the week ● Tell us what hypothesis the MVP is testing, what data you expected and what you actually received. Slide 4: Customer Discovery ● Tell us about your 10 customer interviews. Hypothesis: Here’s What we Thought Experiments: Here’s What we Did Results: Here’s What we Found Action:Here’s What we Are Going to Do Next Slide 5: Mission Model Canvas ● Updated Mission Model Canvas with week-to-week changes shown in red ● Multi-sided markets shown in different colors All teams: Come Prepared to answer the following questions: ● What’s the difference between search and execution? ● What is a business model versus a business plan? ● What is the Mission Model Canvas? ● What are the 9 components of the Mission Model Canvas? ● What is the Mission Model Canvas? ● What are the 9 components of the Mission Model Canvas?
  8. 8. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 8 of 47 ● What is a hypothesis? ● What do we mean by “experiments”? ● What is Customer Development? ● What are the key tenets of Customer Development? ● What is an MVP? ● What are your first few of MVPs going to be? Lecture/Discussion: Beneficiaries: Beneficiaries, Customer Development in the DOD/IC: ● review of the Overview of the 4 types of DOD/IC "Customers": Concept developers, Requirement writers, Buyers (Acquisition PM's), Users (the tactical folks). ● Who are your beneficiaries? o What are their relationships to each other? What are their interests? ● Dual-use technologies – who might be commercial customers. Can you serve both market segments? ● Limits of Customer Development in the DOD/IC Reading on March 30th for Class 2 Beneficiaries ● Read BMG: pp 127-133 [Loc 1691 – 1800] customer insights, pp 161-168 [Loc 2205 – 2381] prototyping ● Read SOM: pp 85-92 [Loc 1582 – 1680] customer segments, pp. 203-214 [Loc 3198 – 3375] problem understanding, pp. 218-219 [Loc 3433 – 3455] gain customer understanding, pp. 222-224 [Loc 3482 – 3517] Market Knowledge, pp. 260-266 [Loc 4013 – 4129] product/market fit pp. 476-477 [Loc 7068 – 7099] customer segment checklist ● Osterwalder Value Proposition Canvas at http://businessmodelalchemist.com/blog/2012/08/achieve-product-market-fit-with- our-brand-new-value-proposition-designer.html and http://businessmodelalchemist.com/blog/2012/09/test-your-value-proposition- supercharge-lean-startup-and-custdev-principles.html Viewing evening of March 30th for Class 2 Beneficiaries ● Watch: online lessons 3 Customer Segments Update your blogs
  9. 9. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 9 of 47 Workshop1 April 4,7-8:30 PM, GSB G101 Howto Workwith the DOD/IC This goal of the workshop is to give students an overview of how the DOD/IC Community is organized, who are the key customers and how they specify, buy and deploy products. 1. Role of the DOD/IC in the U.S. 2. Organization of the DOD/IC 3. How does the DOD/IC specify/acquire/deploy a. Commercial off-the-shelf products b. New technology/systems 4. Exceptions/shortcuts to the process specify/acquire/deploy a. Organizations in DOD/IC that want shortcuts b. DOD/IC incubators, venture firms, innovation outposts i. In-Q-Tel, Lab 41, Lab 24, TAOx, DIUx, etc 5. Overview of the types of DOD/IC "Customers”. For example: a. Concept developers b. Requirement writers c. Buyers (Acquisition PM's) d. Users (the tactical folks)
  10. 10. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 10 of 47 Class 2 April 5th Team Presentation: Beneficiaries Lecture: Value Proposition Team Presentation for today’s April 5th class Beneficiaries 8 minutes per team Slide 1 Title slide ● Team name, team members/roles, support team (liaisons, tech mentors, problems sponsors) ● Number of customers spoken to this week ● Total number spoken to ● Three sentence description what the team does and why should sponsor care Slide 2: Customer Discovery ● Tell us about your 10 customer interviews. Hypothesis: Here’s What we Thought Experiments: Here’s What we Did Results: Here’s What we Found Action:Here’s What we Are Going to Do Next Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas ● Updated Mission Model Canvas with week-to-week changes shown in red ● Multi-sided markets shown in different colors Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas ● For each customer segment develop a value proposition canvas ● http://www.businessmodelgeneration.com/downloads/value_proposition_canvas.p df o What are the Gains, Pain, Customer Jobs? o How do they solve this problem(s) today? Does your value proposition solve it? How? o What is the Customer Archetype? o What’s the MVP you’ll test? Slide 5: Diagram the Customer workflow Slide 6 Minimal Viable Product ● Show us your MVP of the week
  11. 11. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 11 of 47 ● Tell us what hypothesis the MVP is testing, what data you expected and what you actually received. Reading evening of April 6th for Class 3 Value Proposition ● Read BMG: pp. 127-133 [Loc 1691 – 1800] Customer Insights, pp 134-145 [Loc 1801 – 2003] Ideation, pp 161-169 [Loc 2205 – 2381] prototyping ● Read SOM: pp 85-92 [Loc 1582 – 1680] Customer Segments, pp 203-226 [Loc 3198 – 3532] test problem understanding, pp 260-266 [Loc 4013 – 4116] Have we found product/market fit, pp. 476-477 [Loc 7068 – 7092] customer segments checklist ● Read Autonomow at http://steveblank.com/2014/10/03/my-students-grow-into-a- company/
  12. 12. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 12 of 47 Class 3 April 12th Team Presentation: Value Proposition Lecture: Product/Market Fit Presentation for today’s April 12th class – Value Proposition 8 minutes each (all teams) Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2: Customer Discovery Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas Slide 5 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVPs you’ll test? Lecture/Discussion Product/Market Fit. Update your blogs
  13. 13. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 13 of 47 Class 4 April 19th Team Presentation:Product/Market Fit Team Presentation: Product/Market Fit Lecture: Deployment Presentation For today’s April 19th class Product/Market Fit Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2: Customer Discovery Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas Slide 5 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVP you’ll test? Lecture/Discussion Deployment: How do products get from a company into the DOD/IC? What’s the standard procurement process? How long does it take? Role of major contractors. How to find short cuts. Reading on April 20th for Deployment ● BMG pp. 147-159 [Loc 2004 – 2204] Visual Thinking Update your blogs
  14. 14. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 14 of 47 Class 5 April 26th Team Presentation: Deployment Lecture: Buy-In/Support Presentation For today’s April 26h class Deployment Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2: Customer Discovery o How does the product get deployed? Are there alternatives? o What was it that made deployment partners interested? excited? o Draw the deployment diagram - Annotate it with the deployment economics Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas Slide 5 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVP you’ll test? Lecture/Discussion: Getting Buy-in / Support: How do you get buy-in from potential customers. Who needs to buy-in and in what order? What can accelerate the process? What can impede it? Reading on April 20th for Buy-In/Support ● SOM pp. 126-143 [Loc 2167 – 2348] customer relationships hypotheses, pp. 296-303 [Loc 4495 – 4582] Get/Keep/Grow, pp. 480-482 [ Loc 7141 – 7207] Relationships checklist, pp. 489 [Loc 7303] Test the Problem and its importance Viewing for April 18th ● Watch Online Lectures Lesson 5: Customer Relationships Update your blogs
  15. 15. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 15 of 47 Class 6 May 3rd Team Presentation: Buy-In/Support Lecture: MissionAchievement Presentation For today’s May 3rd class Buy In/Support Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2: Customer Discovery ● Draw the Get/Keep/Grow diagram - Annotate it with the key metrics Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas Slide 5 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVP you’ll test? Lecture/Discussion Mission Achievement. Update your blogs
  16. 16. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 16 of 47 Class 7 May 10th Team Presentation: MissionAchievement Lecture: Activities & Resources Presentation for today’s May 10th class Mission Achievement Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2: Customer Discovery Slide 3: Mission Model Canvas Slide 4: Value Proposition Canvas Slide 5 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVP you’ll test? • Slide 6: Iterate: So Here’s What We Are Going To Do Next Week Lecture– Activities & Resources Homework Viewing for May 2nd ● Watch Online lectures Lesson 7: Activities/Resources Update your blogs
  17. 17. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 17 of 47 Class 8 May 17th Team Presentation: Activities & Resources Lecture: Partners & Costs Presentation for today’s May 17th Class Activities/Resources Slide 1 Title slide Slide 2 What are your critical Activities? ● Software Development? Manufacturing? Freedom to operate/Intellectual Property? Regulatory approval? Slide 3: What are your critical Resources? ● (Resources should match your critical Activities) ● Are they resources you already have? Do you need to acquire or partner with others to get them? How much will they cost? o What human resources will you need? What equipment resources will you need? What financial resources will you need to acquire all these resources? Slide 4 Diagram of activities and resources/partners needed to accomplish them Slide 5 Mission Model Canvas Slide 6 Value Proposition Canvas Slide 7 Minimal Viable Product o What are the Products/Services, Pain Relievers, Gain Creators? o What’s the MVPs you’ll test? Lecture: Partners & Costs Reading for May 17th Partners/Costs ● SOM pp. 180-188 [Loc 2854 – 2982] revenue and pricing hypotheses, pp. 260-269 [Loc 4013 – 4162] verify business model, pp. 438 [Loc 6425] metrics that matter, pp. 528 [Loc 8001]Validate Financial Model Assignment ● Keep talking to 10-15 customers a week ● draft 10-minute presentation and a 2-minute video
  18. 18. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 18 of 47 Class 9 May 24th Reflections Day Team Presentation: Partners & Costs + Draft Lessons Learned 1. Come prepared with a draft of your final presentation a. You should have a draft of the slides you will present on May 31st b. You do not need the final fancy graphics or finished diagrams i. Use placeholders if needed 2. We will review best practices for Lessons Learned 3. We will select two teams to present their draft to the entire class. a. The teaching team will go through those presentations slide-by-slide b. Then the teaching team will rotate through the rest of the teams giving you specific pointers on how to tell the story of what you’ve learned 4. Next draft of your slides needed to be up on class dropbox by 5pm May 30th a. Teaching team will give your slides one final review and send you comments that evening 5. Final slides and videos – approved by teaching team - need to uploaded to dropbox by 3 pm May 31st a. Videos need to handed to TA on a memory stick before class Presentation for today’s May 24th Class Partners & Costs ● Slide 1: Title slide ● Show us your MVP ● Slide 2: What were your hypotheses about what Partners will you need? (Partners should match your critical Resources and Activities) o Why do you need these partners and what are risks? o Why will they partner with you? o What’s the cost of the partnership? o Diagram the partner relationships with any dollar flows o What are the incentives and impediments for the partners? ● Slide 3: What did you learn about your Costs? o Hypothesis: Here’s What We Thought o Experiments: So Here’s What We Did o Results: So Here’s What We Found ● Slide 4: What experiments do you run to test your fixed and variable costs? ● Slide 4: Mission Model canvas with any changes marked in red, Multi-sided markets shown in different colors (Is this a multi-sided market?) ● Slide 5: Diagram of Costs flows (a costed bill of materials for hardware/services)
  19. 19. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 19 of 47 ● Slide 5: Rough three-year finance, operations and fundraising timeline. ● Slide 6: Diagram the finance and operations timeline ● Update your MVP Class 10 May 31st Team Presentations ofLessons Learned H4D Final Assignment Deliverable: On May 31st each team will present a 10-minute “Lessons Learned” presentation (2 min video summarizing journey; 8 min final presentation) and will have 5 min Q&A from the teaching team. Goal: Communicate what you learned in 10 weeks and how you learned it. Show what you learned and how you learned it. Use the language of class; interview, iterations, pivots, restarts, experiments, MVPs, evidence. The focus of your presentation will be on how you gathered evidence and how it impacted your understanding of your business models – while you were building your MVP. Strategy: Tell us how you used customer discovery and MVP’s to evolve your mission model through iterations, why you Pivoted through the accumulation of evidence outside the classroom. Tactics: show: ● Initial hypotheses and Petal diagram ● quotes from customers that illustrate learnings insights ● diagrams of key parts of the Canvas –customer flow, channel, get/keep/grow (before and after) ● Pivot stories, ● Screen shots of the evolution of MVP ● Demo of final MVP ● Bring any “show and tell items” View the best practice examples on Dropbox at: http://bit.ly/1WDOUez View sample presentations from Engineering 245 at: http://venturewell.org/i-corps/team-materials/ Presentation library at: http://www.slideshare.net/sblank
  20. 20. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 20 of 47 2-minute video In addition to your 8-minute presentation, create a 2-minute video to be shown at the beginning of your final presentation. The video should summarize the customer discovery journey your team went on, highlighting the key customer insights that took you from your initial idea to today. Storytelling quality is critical. High production value is not (some of the best videos have been very straightforward). Make it personal - include the team in the video as well as key "aha" moments. This video is about the discovery process. It is NOT a marketing video for your product. See sample videos here: Bionicks Video, Gutwiser Final Video, Dentometrix Video Final PresentationOutline Slide 1 – ● Team Name, ● A few lines of what your initial idea was ● The size of the opportunity (TAM/SAM) ● Total number of customers personal spoken to (any email or survey numbers in parentheses) Slide 2 – Team members – name, background, expertise and your role on the team. Name of mentor and their affiliation. Slide 3 – Original Hypotheses ● The World – market/opportunity, how does it operate ● The Characters – customers/value proposition/ product-market fit, pick a few examples to illustrate ● Narrative Arc – lessons learned how? Enthusiasm, despair, learning then insight ● Quotes from customers “we loved it” or “stupid idea” ● Show us – images and demo to illustrate learning = diagrams, wireframes & pivots to finished product) ● Editing – does each slide advance the learning Theater ● Point us to what you want us to see ● Ought to be self-explanatory ● Use analogies ● Bring any show and tell examples Slide 4 - Mission Model Canvas Version 1 (use the modified Osterwalder Canvas do not make up your own). “Here was our original idea.” ● Zoom in on the important parts of the canvas to make any key points
  21. 21. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 21 of 47 Slide 5 – “So here’s what we did…” (explain how you got out of the building) ● Show us your first MVP Slide 6 – “So here’s what we found (what was reality), so then…here’s what we did” ● Presentation requires at least three Mission Model Canvas slides o Zoom in on the important parts of the canvas to make any key points ● Presentation requires at least three diagrams of some part of the canvas. For example o Get/Keep/Grow pipeline o Channel diagram o Customer/payer flow o Activities/Resources/Partners connections o Petal diagram o TAM/SAM Side n-1 – “So here’s where we ended up.” Talk about: ● What did you learn ● Show us your final MVP Slide n ● Investment readiness slide ● whether you think this a viable business, ● whether you want to pursue it after the class, etc. Final Slides – Click through each one of your weekly business model canvas slides. Final presentation tips: This is not a Y-Combinator Demo Day. You’ve learned a lot and we want to see what you learned. Not how smart you are at the end of the class. You cannot possibly cover everything you learned in 10 weeks an 8-minute presentation. Don’t try to. The final presentation is partly an exercise in distilling the most critical, surprising, and impactful things you learned in the process. Don’t fall into the trap of making your final presentation too high-level. If it becomes an overview with no details you will lose the audience and you will look no smarter than day 1. We need to see WHY your Mission model canvas evolved the way it did. Include anecdotes about specific customer interviews that support the “what we learned story” you are telling.
  22. 22. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 22 of 47 If you have a demo, prototype, screenshots, etc. include them in your presentation to illustrate your learning process and where it has gotten you (it is called “Lessons Learned Day” and not “Demo Day” for a reason). We are not just interested in WHAT your product is, but WHY your product is – what did you learn from customers that shaped the product? 1. Final draft of your slides needed to be up on class dropbox the night before class, by 5pm May 30th ● Teaching team will give your slides one final review and send you comments that evening 2. Final slides and videos – approved by teaching team - need to uploaded to dropbox the day of the class, by 3pm April May 31st ● Videos need to handed to TA on a memory stick before class Congratulations!
  23. 23. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 23 of 47 Syllabus Appendix A: Instructional Method The class uses eight teaching methods that may be new to you. These include: 1. experiential learning, 2. team-based, 3. a “flipped” classroom, 4. Advanced topic lectures, 5. weekly presentations, 6. team teaching, 7. observing other teams and providing constructive feedback, and 8. LaunchPad Central. 1. Experiential Learning This class is not about the lectures. The learning occurs outside of the classroom through conversations with customers. Each week your team will conduct a minimum of 10 customer interviews focused on a specific part of the business model canvas. This class is a simulation of what startups and entrepreneurship are like in the real world: chaos, uncertainty, impossible deadlines with insufficient time, conflicting input, etc. 2. Team-based This class is team-based. Working and studying will be done in teams of four; admission is based on an interview with the teaching team. The commitment of the entire team to the effort and necessary hours is a key admission criterion. Each and every team member should participate in customer discovery activities (out of the building hypotheses testing) talking with customers and partners. You cannot delegate customer discovery. Teams will self-organize and establish individual roles on their own. There are no formal CEO/VP’s, just the constant parsing and allocating of the tasks that need to be done. In addition to the instructors and TA, each team will be assigned two mentors: a DOD/IC mentor who has provided your problem, and a local mentor (an experienced entrepreneur, service provider, consultant, or investor) to provide assistance and support. 3. The Flipped Classroom Unlike a traditional classroom where the instructor presents lecture material, you’ll watch core weekly lectures on your time. These lectures contain the information you will need to complete that week’s customer interviews. What is traditional homework, (summarizing your weekly team progress updates) is now done in class, with the teaching team offering personalized guidance to each team. 4. Advanced Lectures Online lectures may be supplemented by a deep-dive, in-class lectures tailored to this week’s topic and the DOD/IC community. 5. You Present Your Progress Weekly
  24. 24. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 24 of 47 Each week all teams will present a 10-minute summary of what you learned testing specific hypotheses. The teaching team will provide advice and guidance. 6. Team Teaching and the Inverted Lecture Hall Sitting in the back of the classroom are experienced instructors and Mentors who’ve built and/or funded world-class startups and have worked with hundreds of entrepreneurial teams who will be commenting and critiquing each team’s progress. While the comments may be specific to each team, the insights are almost always applicable to all teams. Pay attention. 7. Actively Observing Other Teams and Providing Written Feedback and Grades The class is a learning cohort. It is your responsibility to help each other and learn from one another’s experiences. This form of collaborative learning will accelerate your team’s progress. Each week, when other teams are presenting, you will be logged into the class on- line management tool, LaunchPad Central, where you will provide feedback, ideas, helpful critiques and suggestions for each team as they present. You will also assign a grade solely on your individual assessment of their performance. This feedback is viewable by all members of the class, and may – at the discretion of the instructors – be shared for class discussion. 8. Keeping Track of Your Progress: LaunchPad Central Each week as you get of the building and talk to customers we have you summarize what you learned using an online tool called LaunchPad Central. The tool automatically collects and displays your current hypotheses and the ones you’ve invalidated. This allows you to share what you’ve learned with the teaching team and your industry experts. This, along with your weekly presentations is how we monitor your progress.
  25. 25. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 25 of 47 Syllabus Appendix B: Class Culture and Workload This class communicates much differently from the typical University or company culture you may be familiar with. This class pushes many people past their comfort zone. At times it may feel harsh and abrupt (we call it relentlessly direct,) but in reality it is focused and designed to create immediate action in time-, resource-, and cash-constrained environments. We have limited time and we push, challenge, and question you in the hope that you’ll learn quickly. The pace and the uncertainty accelerate as the class proceeds. If you believe that the role of your instructors is to praise in public and criticize in private, do not take this class. You will be receiving critiques in front of your peers every week. We will be direct, open, and tough – just like the real world. This approach may seem harsh or abrupt, but it is a direct reflection of our desire for you to learn to challenge yourselves quickly and objectively, and to appreciate that as entrepreneurs you need to learn and evolve faster than you ever imagined possible. This class requires a phenomenal amount of work on your part, certainly compared to many other classes. Projects are treated as real start-ups, so the workload will be intense. Teams have reported up to 15-20 hours of work each week. Getting out of the classroom is what the effort is about. If you can’t commit the time to talk to customers, this class is not for you. Teams are expected to have completed at least 10 in person or Skype video interviews each week focused in the mission model canvas area of emphasis for that week This means over the 10-week course you will have completed in the range 100 interviews.
  26. 26. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 26 of 47 Syllabus Appendix C: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) HowDo I Apply? ● Download the application form from hacking4defense.stanford.edu Enrollment ● Admission is by teams of 4 Stanford students from any school or department ● Teams must interview with the teaching team prior to the class start date. ● Your entire team must attend the first class to be enrolled. ● The class list and any wait-listed students will be posted online ● Teams must submit a mission model canvas and interview with the teaching team prior to the class start date. Students ▪ Priority is given to Stanford Graduate students. Non graduates can be on teams. Non students can serve as advisors to the teams. Exceptions for team size and external members will be made on a case-by-case basis. ▪ There are no remote options for this course - you must take the class on campus. HowDo I Find Teams? ▪ Visit the class website and check out the Google doc with the list of students who are interested in the course. Please add yourself and include your areas of interest space. Team Ideas ▪ Do I have to choose an idea that a sponsor is providing? No. You can come up with your own idea and find a DOD/IC sponsor yourself. (The sponsor has to commit to provide the resources as outlined in section 2.) ▪ What if I don’t have an idea? Visit the class website and check out the Google doc with the list of students who have posted their ideas. Talk to them or see if any of the DOD/IC proposals are interesting. ▪ What if I want to propose an idea I have to a DOD/IC organization or agency? Contact the teaching team and we’ll connect you to a sponsoring agency Attendance and Participation ▪ You cannot miss the first class without prior approval ▪ This is very intense class with a very high workload. If you cannot commit to 10-15 hours a week outside the classroom, this class is not for you. ▪ The startup culture at times can feel brusque and impersonal, but in reality is focused and oriented to create immediate action in time- and cash-constrained environments.
  27. 27. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 27 of 47 ▪ If during the semester you find you cannot continue to commit the time, immediately notify your team members and teaching team and drop the class. ▪ If you expect to miss a class, please let the TA and your team members know ahead of time via email. ▪ We expect your attention during our presentations and those of your fellow students. If you’re getting bored, tired or inattentive step outside for some air. If we see you reading email or browsing the web we will ask you to leave the class. ▪ We ask that you use a name card during every session of the quarter. ▪ During your classmates’ presentations you will be required to give feedback online via the LaunchPad Central system. Please bring a laptop to every class and be prepared to give your undivided attention to the team at the front of the room. Intellectual Property Who owns the intellectual property tested in the Mission Model? If you’re working with a Stanford related-technology (i.e. either research from one of the team members or University IP), you must check with the Office of Technology, Licensing to understand Stanford ownership rights in any resulting IP. 1. You own what Intellectual Property (patents, hardware, algorithms, etc.) you brought to class with you. No one (other than Stanford) has claim to anything you brought to class. 2. You all own any intellectual property developed for the class (such as code for a web- based project) developed during class. You are agreeing to open-source your class developed assets. Your DOD/IC sponsor will have access to those materials. 3. You and your team members need to disclose to each other and your DOD/IC sponsor what IP/Licensing rights any company you’ve worked at has to inventions you make at school. 4. If any or you decide to start a company based on the class, you own only what was written and completed in the class. You have no claim for work done before or after the class quarter. 5. If a subset of the team decides to start a company they do NOT “owe” anything to any other team members for work done in and during the class. All team members are free to start the same company, without permission of the others. (We would hope that a modicum of common sense and fairness would apply.) 6. By taking this class you have agreed to these terms with your team. You may decide to modify these terms before the class by having all team members agree in writing before the team is accepted in the class.
  28. 28. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 28 of 47 ● I feel my idea / Mission Model may become a real company and the "next killer app" and I want to own it myself what should I do? This is more than likely the wrong class to take. Your slides, notes and findings will be publically shared. Your team owns everything done in class. Discuss Intellectual Property rights with your team from the beginning. If you can’t come to agreement with the team, join another team, pick another project, or drop the class. Remember anything you do and learn in the class is public. ● Will my Intellectual Property rights be protected when I discuss my ideas with the class? NO. This is an open class. There are no non-disclosures. All your presentations and Customer Discovery and Validation notes, business model canvas, blogs and slides can, and most likely will, be made public. ● This class is not an incubator. At times you will learn by seeing how previous classes solved the same class of problem by looking at their slides, notes and blogs. Keep in mind that successful companies are less about the original idea and more about the learning, discovery and execution. (That’s the purpose of this class.) Therefore you must be prepared to share your ideas openly with the class. It is a forum for you to "bounce" your ideas off your peers. ● I’m not comfortable sharing what I learn with others what should I do? Don’t take this class. ● This class is not an incubator. At times you will learn by seeing how previous classes solved the same class of problem by looking at their slides, notes and blogs. Help! ● What kind of support will our team have? The teaching team consists of professors, a TA and at least two mentors per team. A mentor is an experienced defense/IC official, investor or consultant assigned to your team. They’ve volunteered to help with the class and your team because they love hard problems and they love startups. Their job is to guide you as you get out of the building. ● How often can we/should we meet with our mentor? Your mentor is expecting to meet with you at least every week face-to-face or by Skype. You can email them or meet with them more often if they have time. ● Can I talk to a mentor not assigned to my team? By all means, do so. All the mentors are happy to help. However they cannot support your team full time unless your mentor decides to swap places with them. ● I have a busy schedule and my mentor can’t meet when I want them to. Mentors have day jobs. Asking them to meet or reply to you ASAP is not acceptable. So plan ahead to allow for a reasonable amount of time for a reply or meeting. Be concise
  29. 29. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 29 of 47 with your request and be respectful of their time. ● I need help now. You first stop is your TAs. Email or sit down with them during the week if you have a problem. Your professors have office hours every Wednesday at 4:30-5:30pm. If you need something resolved sooner, email us. Team Dynamics ● What roles are in each team? Traditionally, each team member is part of the “customer development team”. You have to figure out how to allocate the work. ● What if my team becomes dysfunctional? Prepare to work through difficult issues. If the situation continues, approach the teaching team. Do not wait until the end of the quarter to raise the issue. ● What if one of my teammates is not "pulling his/her weight"? Try to resolve it within your team. If the situation continues longer than a week, please approach the teaching team. Final grades will also reflect individual participation and contribution. ● What kind of feedback can I expect? Continual feedback weekly. Substandard quality work will be immediately brought to your attention
  30. 30. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 30 of 47 Syllabus Appendix D: Faculty STEVE BLANK A RETIRED EIGHT-TIME SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR, Steve's insight that startups are not small versions of large companies is reshaping the way startups are built and how entrepreneurship is taught. His observation that large companies execute business models, but startups search for them, led him to realize that startups need their own tools, different than those used to manage existing companies. Steve's first tool for startups, the Customer Development methodology, spawned the Lean Startup movement. The fundamentals of Customer Development are detailed in Blank's books, The Four Steps to the Epiphany and the The Startup Owner's Manual. Blank teaches Customer Development and entrepreneurship at Stanford University, U.C. Berkeley Haas Business School and Columbia University, and his Customer Development process is taught at Universities throughout the world. In 2011, he developed the Lean LaunchPad, a hands-on class that integrates Business Model design and Customer Development into practice through fast-paced, real-world customer interaction and business model iteration. In 2011, the National Science Foundation adopted Blank's class for its Innovation Corps (I-Corps), training teams of the nation's top scientists and engineers to take their ideas out of the university lab and into the commercial marketplace. In 2009 Steve earned the Stanford University Undergraduate Teaching Award in Management Science and Engineering. In 2010, he earned the Earl F. Cheit Outstanding Teaching Award at U.C. Berkeley Haas School of Business. Eight startups in 21 years After repairing fighter plane electronics in Thailand during the Vietnam War, Steve arrived in Silicon Valley in 1978. He joined his first of eight startups including two semiconductor companies, Zilog and MIPS Computers; Convergent Technologies; a consulting stint for Pixar; a supercomputer firm, Ardent; a peripheral supplier, SuperMac; a military intelligence systems supplier, ESL; and Rocket Science Games. Steve co-founded startup number eight, E.piphany, in his living room in 1996. In sum: two significant implosions, one massive "dot-com bubble" home run, several "base hits," and immense learning that resulted in The Four Steps to the Epiphany. An avid reader in history, technology, and entrepreneurship, Steve has followed his curiosity about why entrepreneurship blossomed in Silicon Valley while stillborn elsewhere. It has made him an unofficial expert and frequent speaker on "The Secret History of Silicon Valley."
  31. 31. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 31 of 47
  32. 32. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 32 of 47 TOM BYERS PROFESSOR, MANAGEMENT SCIENCEAND ENGINEERING. At Stanford University since 1995, Professor Tom Byers focuses on education regarding high-growth entrepreneurship and technology innovation. He is the first holder of the Entrepreneurship Professorship endowed chair in the School of Engineering, and is also a Bass University Fellow in Undergraduate Education. He has been a faculty director since the inception of the Stanford Technology Ventures Program (STVP), which serves as the entrepreneurship center for the engineering school. STVP includes the Mayfield Fellows work/study program for undergraduates, the Accel Innovation Scholars for PhD students, and the Entrepreneurship Corner (ECorner) collection of thought leader videos. He is a principal investigator and the director of the National Center for Engineering Pathways to Innovation (Epicenter,) which is funded by the National Science Foundation to stimulate entrepreneurship education at all USA engineering and science colleges. He is the co-author of an entrepreneurship textbook called Technology Ventures: From Idea to Enterprise that is published by McGraw-Hill. Tom is a past recipient of the prestigious Gordon Prize by the National Academy of Engineering in the USA and Stanford University's Gores Award, which is its highest honor for excellence in teaching. He has been a member of advisory boards at UC Berkeley, the Harvard Business School, the World Economic Forum, Conservation International, and several private enterprises. Tom was executive vice president and general manager of Symantec Corporation during its formation, and started his business career at Accenture. Tom holds a BS in Industrial Engineering and Operations Research and an MBA from UC Berkeley. He also earned a PhD in Business Administration (Management Science) at UC Berkeley.
  33. 33. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 33 of 47 JOE FELTER COLONEL U.S. ARMY SPECIAL FORCES (ret) and CONSULTING PROFESSOR, MANAGEMENT SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Felter retired from the US Army as a Colonel following a career as a Special Forces and foreign area officer with service in a variety of special operations and diplomatic assignments. While in the military, Joe held leadership positions in the US Army Rangers and Special Forces and participated in combat deployments to Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Prior to coming to Stanford, he commanded the International Security and Assistance Force, Counterinsurgency Advisory and Assistance Team (CAAT) in Afghanistan reporting directly to Gen. Stanley McChrystal and Gen. David Petraeus advising them on counterinsurgency strategy. Felter helped establish the Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) at West Point where he served as Director from 2005- 2008 and expanded its impact and reach as an international center of excellence for terrorism studies and policy analyses. He founded and is Co-Director of the Empirical Studies of Conflict Project (ESOC) and is a Senior Research Scholar at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) and Research fellow at the Hoover Institution. Felter has published widely on topics relating to addressing the root causes of terrorism, insurgency and political violence and his work has appeared in top peer reviewed academic journals including the American Economic Review and Journal of Political Economy. He served as a member of the Army Science Board and has testified in both the US Senate and House of Representatives. Felter holds a BS from West Point, an MPA from the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, and a PhD in Political Science from Stanford University.
  34. 34. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 34 of 47 PETE NEWELL COLONEL U.S. ARMY is a senior visiting research scholar at the National Defense University Center for Technology and National Security Policy (CTNSP) and a senior advisor within the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO). During his 32 years in uniform he served as both an enlisted national guardsman and as an active duty officer. He served in, led, and commanded Infantry units at the platoon through brigade level, while performing peace support, combat, and special operations in Panama, Kosovo, Egypt, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan. During his last assignment in the military he led the U.S. Army Rapid Equipping Force (REF) in the investment of over $1.4B in developing rapid solutions to answer Soldiers’ most pressing needs. Among the initiatives he developed were the Army’s $66M effort to develop and deploy renewable energy systems on the battlefield and the Army’s $45M effort to design an integrated system to gather the data required to determine the potential causes of Traumatic Brain Injury. He was also responsible for the Army’s first deployment of mobile advanced/additive manufacturing labs in a bid to more closely connect scientists and engineers to problems on the battlefield. His efforts to accelerate problem recognition and solution delivery to military units is the subject of the 2013 Stanford Graduate School of Business Case Study “The Rapid Equipping Force Customer Focused Innovation in the U.S. Army” and appears in the 2014 book Scaling Up Excellence: Getting to More Without Settling for Less by Bob Sutton and Huggy Rao. Newell holds a BS from Kansas State University, an MS in Operations from the US Army Command & General Staff College, an MS in Strategy from the National Defense University and Advanced Certificates from the MIT Sloan School and Stanford University Graduate School of Business
  35. 35. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 35 of 47 COURSEADVISOR WILLIAM PERRY COURSE ADVISOR. William Perry is the Michael and Barbara Berberian Professor (emeritus) at Stanford University. He is a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute and the Hoover Institution, and serves as director of the Preventive Defense Project. He is an expert in U.S. foreign policy, national security and arms control. He was the co-director of CISAC from 1988 to 1993, during which time he was also a part-time professor at Stanford. He was a part-time lecturer in the Department of Mathematics at Santa Clara University from 1971 to 1977. Perry was the 19th secretary of defense for the United States, serving from February 1994 to January 1997. He previously served as deputy secretary of defense (1993-1994) and as under secretary of defense for research and engineering (1977-1981). Dr. Perry currently serves on the Defense Policy Board (DPB), the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) and the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB). He is on the board of directors of Covant, Fabrinet, LGS Bell Labs Innovations and several emerging high-tech companies. His previous business experience includes serving as a laboratory director for General Telephone and Electronics (1954-1964); founder and president of ESL Inc. (1964-1977); executive vice-president of Hambrecht & Quist Inc. (1981-1985); and founder and chairman of Technology Strategies & Alliances (1985-1993). He is a member of the National Academy of Engineering and a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. From 1946 to 1947, Perry was an enlisted man in the Army Corps of Engineers, and served in the Army of Occupation in Japan. He joined the Reserve Officer Training Corps in 1948 and was a second lieutenant in the Army Reserves from 1950 to 1955. He was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1997 and the Knight Commander of the British Empire in 1998. Perry has received a number of other awards including the Department of Defense Distinguished Service Medal (1980 and 1981), and Outstanding Civilian Service Medals from the Army (1962 and 1997), the Air Force (1997), the Navy (1997), the Defense Intelligence Agency (1977 and 1997), NASA (1981) and the Coast Guard (1997). He received the American Electronic Association's Medal of Achievement (1980), the Eisenhower Award (1996), the Marshall Award (1997), the Forrestal Medal (1994), and the Henry Stimson Medal (1994). The National Academy of Engineering selected him for the Arthur Bueche Medal in 1996. He has received awards from the enlisted personnel of the Army, Navy, and the Air Force. He has received decorations from the governments of Albania, Bahrain, France, Germany, Hungary, Japan, Korea, Poland, Slovenia, and Ukraine. He received a BS and MS from Stanford University and a PhD from Pennsylvania State
  36. 36. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 36 of 47 University, all in mathematics.
  37. 37. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 37 of 47 COURSEASSISTANTS KIM CHANG HEAD COURSE ASSISTANT. Kim Chang is a second year Master’s student in Management Science & Engineering. She received her undergraduate degree at UC Berkeley in Mechanical Engineering. Her work experience is in mechanical design and manufacturing including periods at General Electric (Energy), Boeing, Apple, and Nest. At Boeing, she worked as a Structural Design Engineer on the 777 Fuselage. She is a 2015-2016 DFJ Entrepreneurial Leadership Fellow. Her areas of interest include hardware entrepreneurship, cybersecurity, energy, and North East Asia (US policy towards and manufacturing systems within). After graduation, she will begin working on the Global Supply Management team at Nest Labs focusing on mechanical components. ENS CHRISDIORIO COURSE ASSISTANT. Ensign Chris DiOrio is a graduate student in the Management Science & Engineering department and an active duty officer in the U.S. Navy. He received his undergraduate degree in electrical engineering at the U.S. Naval Academy, where he also served as the Brigade Commander in charge of the 4500 midshipmen student body. He has interned at NASA Langley Research Center, MIT Lincoln Laboratory, and the National Security Agency. After his graduate studies at Stanford, Chris will enter the Navy’s nuclear power training pipeline to ultimately serve as a submarine officer. KONSTANTINE BUHLER JOHN DENISTON COURSE ASSISTANT. John Deniston is a second year student in the graduate School of Business. His work experience includes Partner Solutions Manager at Medallia, managing four partnerships/27 FTEs. Prior he was an officer in the Air Force Special Operations Command; leading a team of 48 providing 24/7 tailored analysis to forward-deployed special operations teams. Prior, he led a 17-member tactical liaison team
  38. 38. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 38 of 47 in a national agency that leveraged multi-billion dollar space systems to provide timely support to deployed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Deployed multiple times in support of operations in Afghanistan, most recently as a targeting officer embedded with an Army Special Operations team. Graduate of the USAF Weapons School. LT CMDR BENJAMIN KOHLMAN COURSE ASSISTANT. Lieutenant Cmdr U.S. Navy Combat tested F/A-18 naval aviator and entrepreneur, possessing an abiding passion for bringing the most innovative people from the military and civilian world into collaborative ventures with each other. Currently the Speechwriter for the Commander, US Fleet Forces, a four-star Admiral, and a member of Naval Warfare Development Command's CRIC (Chief of Naval Operations Rapid Innovation Cell), responsible for conceptualizing and fielding game- changing, rapidly acquired warfighter solutions. Co-Founder and Director of the Defense Entrepreneurs Forum, a TEDx/Startup weekend- like event in conjunction with the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, highlighting emerging military innovators and leaders from across the Defense ecosystem. Named one of the "Top 99 Under 33" foreign policy leaders by Young Professionals in Foreign Policy and the Diplomatic Courier in Sept 2012. MILITARY LIAISONS AT STANFORD COL JOHN COGBILL LIEUTENANT COLONEL U.S. ARMY was commissioned as an Infantry officer from the United States Military Academy in 1994 and has held a variety of positions in both conventional and special operations units. John’s first assignment was as a Platoon Leader and Executive Officer in the 82nd Airborne Division. John then served two years in the 1st Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment as a Platoon Leader and Civil-Military Affairs Officer. Next, John served three years in Alaska as an Airborne Rifle Company Commander and the Aide- de-Camp to the Commanding General. After earning his MPA from the Harvard Kennedy School, John taught Economics in the Social Sciences Department at West Point. Following the Command and General Staff College, he spent two years as a Combined Arms Battalion Executive Officer in the 1st Cavalry Division. He then served as the Strategic Plans and Requirements Officer for the 75th Ranger Regiment. Most recently, John commanded the
  39. 39. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 39 of 47 Reconnaissance and Surveillance Squadron for the U.S. Army Third Corps. John has deployed on three combat and two peacekeeping missions, including two tours in Iraq, one tour in Afghanistan, one tour in Haiti, and a recent tour in Kosovo. He will be exploring how the Army can encourage innovation and use emerging technologies to achieve and maintain a competitive advantage on the battlefield. CMDR TODD CIMICATA COMMANDER US NAVY, is a national security affairs fellow for the academic year 2015–2016 at the Hoover Institution. Commander Cimicata earned his undergraduate degree in mechanical engineering from Villanova University and holds a master’s degree in aeronautical engineering from the Air Force Institute of Technology. He is a qualified naval aviator and test pilot who has flown more than thirty different military and civilian aircraft, with most of his flight time in the F- 14 and F-18. He has served in a variety of positions within carrier-based and test commands, on the senior European Command staff in Germany, and as the lead adviser on US air policy and strategy at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in Brussels. Most recently, he commanded a super-hornet squadron that deploys with Carrier Air Wing 11 on the USS Nimitz. His research interests include foreign policy, a strategy for the Arctic, and the navy’s pivot to the Pacific, as well as the efficient acquisition and use of emerging technologies. LTC COL SCOTT MAYTAN LIEUTENANT COLONEL U.S. AIR FORCE was the commander of a B-52H operational bomb squadron, responsible for ensuring combat mission readiness for any worldwide nuclear or conventional tasking. Lt Col Maytan is a navigator with over 2500 flying hours, primarily in the B-52H, and is a graduate of both the Command and General Staff College (U.S. Army) and the U.S. Air Force Weapons School. He has served four operational assignments, as an advanced tactics instructor, and also a tour at the Pentagon where he developed Air Force positions concerning long-range strike and aircraft nuclear requirements. Lt Col Maytan has served three combat deployments for Operations Desert Fox (Southern Watch), Allied Force and Iraqi Freedom and has also deployed four times supporting USPACOM’s Continuous Bomber Presence mission. Maytan will be studying the “red-lines” that shape Western deterrence posture, and how strategic action and deterrence posture in one region affects others. COL JOHN CHU COLONEL U.S. ARMY is an active duty officer in the United States Army. Chu has held a variety of leadership and staff positions in his 20 year career. Most recently, he served as the Chief of Intelligence Training at the
  40. 40. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 40 of 47 Department of the Army. Chu has twice been deployed to Iraq and once to Bosnia, with multiple assignments to South Korea, Germany and Turkey. Born in Seoul, he grew up in California and graduated from West Point in 1995. At Stanford, Chu is researching the Korean armistice agreement and the United Nations mission to South Korea. He will also examine U.S. policy toward North Korea, particularly analyzing the “brink of war” tension and developing strategic deterrence measures to reduce risk of unwanted military escalation on the Korean Peninsula. For both research streams, Chu aims to produce analyses and recommendations that could inform a policy audience. LTC RYAN BLAKE LIEUTENANT COLONEL U.S. AIR FORCE is an active duty officer in the United States Air Force. Blake was the commander of a flight test squadron where he was responsible for the flight test of new Air Force programs. He has over 2,400 flying hours in over 40 types of aircraft, and has held two operational F-15E assignments, including combat deployments in support of Operations Southern Watch, Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. He had also been positioned at the Pentagon in defense acquisition and the Office of Security Cooperation in Baghdad. At Stanford, Blake is researching the U.S. policy toward China and its relation to Northeast Asia. He aims to discover areas of cooperation between the U.S. and Chinese militaries. LTC JOSE “ED” SUMANGIL LIEUTENANT COLONEL U.S. AIR FORCE is an active duty officer in the United States Air Force. During his career, Sumangil has served in a range of operational assignments, including joint staff officer at U.S. Strategic Command where he was a lead planner of the command’s space campaign. Before coming to Stanford, he was the commander of a B-1 squadron and led airmen through combat deployments in support of Operations Enduring Freedom, Inherent Resolve and Freedom’s Sentinel. At Stanford, Sumangil is examining China’s actions in the South China Sea and the Philippines arbitration case regarding Chinese actions there. He seeks to offer perspectives and policy and strategy options to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea. LTC MIKE MICKE LIEUTENANT COLONEL, U.S. MARINE CORPS is and active duty officer in the United States Marine Corps. Micke enlisted in the US Naval Reserve as a Seabee in 1988 and was commissioned in the US Marine Corps in 1996. He is an aviation command and control officer by trade. Micke holds a BA in criminology with a minor in political science from the University of Minnesota–Duluth, a master’s degree in military operational art and science from the US Air Force Air Command and Staff College and is a graduate of the Joint Forces
  41. 41. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 41 of 47 Staff College. He has served in a variety of billets, including as an exchange officer with the United Kingdom’s Royal Air Force, as an instructor at the US Air Force Air Command and Staff College, and as the deputy marine liaison officer at the Combined Air and Space Operations Center in Qatar. Most recently, he commanded Marine Air Support Squadron 3 at Camp Pendleton, California. In 1990 he was recalled to active duty for Operation Desert Shield/Storm and has since participated in Operation Southern Watch, Exercise Bright Star 2005, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and Operation Enduring Freedom. His research at Hoover is focused on current and future national security issues. LTC STEVE BEHMER LIEUTENANT COLONEL, U.S. AIR FORCE is and active duty officer in the United States Air Force. Steve earned his undergraduate degree from the US Air Force Academy; he holds master’s degrees in aeronautical science (from Embry Riddle Aeronautical University) and military operational art and science (from the Air Command and Staff College). He is also an in residence graduate of Squadron Officers School and Air War College (via distributed learning). Before beginning his fellowship, Behmer was commander of the 354th Fighter Squadron at Davis Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona and the commander of the 354th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron at Campia Turzii in Romania. He has had a number of assignments flying the A¬10C, including as operations officer at the US Air Force Weapons School and multiple deployments to Afghanistan. He has a broad background in fighter and joint operations, having worked on the air staff forward at Al Udeid, Qatar, as well as a joint assignment at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Allied Air Command in Europe. CAPTAIN CHRIS CONLEY CAPTAIN, U.S. COAST GUARD is and active duty officer in the United States Coast Guard. Chris is a coast guard aviator specializing in response operations who began his career by earning a commission from the US Coast Guard Academy in 1994. He holds masters’ degrees in instructional systems design from the University of South Alabama and in national security and strategic studies from the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island. Conley has served at a variety of aviation units, conducting search and rescue and law enforcement operations from Kodiak, Alaska, to Clearwater, Florida. As an instructor pilot at the Coast Guard’s Aviation Training Center, he led the performance technology branch and participated in rescue operations in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. He served as the executive assistant to the director of operations at the US Northern Command and as chief of response at Coast Guard Sector in San Diego, California. Most recently, Commander Conley was the commanding officer of Coast Guard Air Station in Los Angeles, California
  42. 42. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 42 of 47 Class Strategy This is a practical class – essentially a lab, not a theory or “book” class. Our goal, within the constraints of a classroom and a limited amount of time, is to help you understand customer and stakeholder needs in the Department of Defense and Intelligence Community and: 1. Profoundly understanding the problems/needs of government customers using the Lean LaunchPad Methodology 2. Rapidly iterate technology solutions while searching for product-market fit 3. Understand all the stakeholders, deployment issues, costs, resources, and ultimate mission value The class uses the Lean Startup method. Rather than engaging in months of business planning, the method assumes that all you have is a series of untested hypotheses— basically, good guesses about what the product solution is, who the customer is, other stakeholders, impact of potential regulation, deployment, funding, etc. And that regardless of how elegant your plan, the reality is that most of it is wrong. You need to get out of the building and get off campus to search for the facts that validate or invalidate your hypotheses, and ultimately enable you to pursue strategies that will accelerate the launch and development of your business. Our class formalizes this search for a repeatable, scalable mission model. We do it with a process of hypothesis testing familiar to everyone who has been in a science lab. In this class you’ll learn how to use a mission model canvas (a diagram of how your organization will create value for itself and mission value for its customers) to frame your hypotheses. Second, you’ll “get out of the building” using an approach called Customer Development to test your hypotheses. You’ll run experiments with DOD/IC customers/stakeholders/advocates and collect evidence about whether each of your business hypotheses is true or false. (Simultaneously you’ll be using use agile development to rapidly build minimal viable products to accompany those experiments to elicit customer feedback.) That means that every week you’ll be talking to DOD/IC customers and stakeholders outside the classroom testing your assumptions about different customers, product features, mission value, deployment, requirements and the government acquisition process. (You’ll talk with at least 100 of them during the class.)
  43. 43. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 43 of 47 Then, using those customers’ input to revise your assumptions and hypotheses, you’ll start the cycle over again, testing redesigned offerings and making further small adjustments (iterations) or more substantive changes (pivots) to ideas that aren’t working. The goal is to build/design something DOD/IC customers would actually want to use and deploy. This process of making substantive changes to one or more of your mission model hypotheses – called pivots – before your DOD/IC customers would start an acquisition program for tens or hundreds of millions dollars, helps you avoid huge future costs and potentially unforeseen dead-ends far down the road of development. (A pivot might mean changing your position in the value chain. For example; your team may realize that you can buy an off-the-shelf product and modify it to solve and immediate customer need. Or you can become an OEM supplier to a government contractor providing a critical part of a larger system, rather than selling directly to SOCOM.) Other pivots may move your company from a platform technology to becoming a product supplier, or from a systems supplier to a service provider. Some teams may make even more radical changes. For example, your team may discover that there are more customers in the DOD than your original DOD/IC mentor. Or you might discover that the product you’re developing is dual-use (it can be used for DOD/IC applications as well as the broader civilian market.) Instructional Method The class uses eight teaching methods that may be new to you. These include: 1. Experiential learning 2. Team-based 3. A “flipped” classroom 4. Advanced topic lectures 5. Weekly presentations 6. Team teaching
  44. 44. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 44 of 47 7. Observing other teams and providing constructive feedback 8. Your blog with your customer narrative.
  45. 45. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 45 of 47 Class Roadmap Your team has weekly activities inside and outside the classroom. Outside the classroom ● Doing homework: Assigned reading and video lectures ● Talking to their DOD/IC mentor ● Engaging with their local mentor ● Completing Customer Discovery with 10-15 customers/stakeholders/partners ● Updating their Minimal Viable Product ● Capturing their customer discovery progress in LaunchPad Central (see Appendix E) and updating their Mission Model Canvas ● Taking what they learned and assembling a 10-minute Lessons Learned presentation. ● Attending mandatory office hours ● Listening to comments and suggestions from the teaching team on the lessons learned
  46. 46. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 46 of 47 The flow of the class starts with teams preparing the latest MVP to show DOD/IC customers. The MVP is used to test a specific mission model hypothesis. The team then gets out the building with their MVP and talks to 10-15 customers validating or invalidating hypotheses they were testing. As they talk to customers during the week they are updating their customer discovery narrative in LaunchPad Central. They gather all the information they learned during the week meet with their DOD/IC mentor, have office hours, and prepare a 10minute in-class presentation of what they learned. After class they read the course text to prepare them for the next weeks mission model hypothesis testing. They accomplish this by: In the classroom: ● Teams present and receive instructor critiques in their cohort ● Instructors offer advanced lecture on DOD/IC specific advice on one of the 9 mission model building blocks to help prepare you for next week’s Discovery Guidelines for team presentations Each team is expected to speak to at least 10-15 customers every week. The 8-minute weekly team presentations should summarize the team’s findings of that week. Each week you’re expected to have an updated version of your entire mission model canvas, but your customer discovery efforts should focus primarily on the topic listed on the Mission Model Canvas for the week that was discussed at the end of previous class. This update is required regardless of whether you’ve pivoted and are re-exploring topics from earlier lectures. In the case of a pivot (which can be indicative of successful customer discovery), you will have to work doubly hard to cover earlier class topics and touch on current class topics in your weekly presentation. Feedback from the teaching team during oral presentations is where the most learning occurs. Due to the pace and tempo of the course, all students will held accountable to have completed the reading and video materials detailed in the syllabus covering the material for each class.
  47. 47. MS&E 297 2016 Syllabus H4D 2016 Syllabus revision 1 Page 47 of 47

×