agile, bmnt, business model, corporate innovation, customer development,dod,nsa, diux, h4d, hacking for defense, lean, lean launchpad, lean startup, stanford, steve blank

1. Team Sentinel
● Team members:
○ Jared Dunnmon
○ Darren Hau
○ Atsu Kobashi
○ Rachel Moore
● Cumulative # of interviews: 100 + 12
○ Users: 4 MDA SMEs: 3 Buyer SMEs: 5
● What we do: Enable rapid, well-informed decisions for anti-IUU and future C2 by combining
effective UI with high data density, local storage, and analytics
○ Open and automated data aggregation (i.e. incorporate open source data)
○ Flexible layering and filtering with improved UI/UX
○ Enhanced intel through contextualization and easily accessible, common database
○ Identifying deviations from baseline by utilizing historical data
● Military Liaisons
○ --- (Colonel, US Army)
○ --- (Commander, US Navy)
● Problem Sponsor
○ --- (Lieutenant, US Navy 7th Fleet)
● Tech Mentors include:
○ --- (BAH)

2. QUOTE OF THE WEEK
“There are solutions out there that may work, but
the biggest problem is implementation.”

3. Contents
1. MVP
1. Key Partners, Resources, and Activities
1. Learning about Costs
1. Experiments for Fixed Cost, Variable Cost
1. Mission Model Canvas
1. Cost Flows
1. Finance and Operations Timeline

4. MVP
CIC PACOM
Surface radar contact
but no AIS… This is
odd. Let me ALERT
others.

5. MVP
CIC PACOM
Surface radar contact
but no AIS… This is
odd. Let me ALERT
others.
I see an ALERT from
DDG102. Lets share
the C2 screen and
take a look

6. MVP
CIC PACOM

7. MVP
CIC PACOM

8. Customer Discovery DeploymentProduct Development Navy
Testing
Initial
Testing
Information
Assurance
Maintenance
& Support
Key Partners, Resources, Activities
TRL 1 TRL 2 TRL 3 TRL 4 TRL 5 TRL 6 TRL 7 TRL 8 TRL 9

9. Partners Resources Incentives Risks & Obstacles
DIUx $50-100K (?), network Create + validate innovation
transfer model
Spending authority is not as broad as we
expect
NPS Network, access to data sources, SME on analytics, Navy
systems
Inter-university collaboration Their research thrust might differ from
ours
SeaVision, SkyTruth, Sea
Scout
Exposure to existing tools, data sources Outside team addressing
capability gaps in IUU fishing
They have stake in their own tool,
proprietary or classified tools and data
Palantir Access to tools, technical advice, B2G experience Leads to Navy as potential
customer
They might decide to create own tool
Lawyers IP and contracting expertise $150K (?) Finding lawyers with the right experience
and investment in our problem
Sub-contractor (i.e.
Lockheed Martin,
OGSystems)
Expertise in contracting work with government $50K (?), potential future work
with Navy
Finding the right company with solid
track record and willingness to work with
non-traditional
GSA/18F Highest-level information assurance Fulfill their purpose People unfamiliar w/ process = slow
GSA IA route actually takes longer
OPNAV/SPAWAR/NWDC Explicit requirements statements
Expertise on procurement routes
Testing in relevant environment
Improving function of Navy tools Might not be open to working with non-
traditional groups
Coast Guard, 7th Fleet, 3rd
Fleet, PACOM
Understanding of pain points + use cases
User feedback on MVP and product
Buy-in from top levels
Bringing in C2 tools built for
millennial sailors
Complexity of navigating large org
Low bandwidth / availability
Key Partners, Resources, Activities

10. Key Cost Experiments
Hypotheses Experiments Results Action
There are different
kinds of contract
vehicles worth
considering (cost plus
award, cost plus fixed
fee, fixed fee, T&M)
-Interview with
General Partner of
mid-size defense
(OGSystems)
-Will do more
validation!
Validated with caveat that, at least
within IC community, there is a
shift towards cost plus fixed fee
b/c validating performance for
award is too cumbersome (more
experiments will be run for further
validation)
- Talk with people within
Navy who are familiar
with Navy contracts to
determine appropriate
cost structure
Necessary to expend
resources setting up
quality process (i.e. AS-
9100, ISO-9000)
-Interview with
General Partner of
mid-size defense
(OGSystems)
-Will do more
validation!
Invalidated! These are nice-to-
haves at least for signing the first
contract (more experiments will
be run for further validation)
- Talk with people within
Navy who are familiar
with Navy contracts to
determine appropriate
quality process for first
contract
Information assurance
process is avoidable
and therefore we don’t
have to worry about its
associated costs
- Interview with
problem sponsor
Jason
-Interview with
NWDC
Invalidated, but there are potential
shortcuts like the Office of Digital Services,
18F, and GSA that would hold us to a
higher standard yet allow us to circumvent
the long and expensive typical IA process;
NWDC personnel can give us excruciating
detail
- Talk with Office of
Digital, 18F, and GSA or
people who are familiar
with these avenues as
acquisition pathways

11. Experiments for FC and VC Validation
Experiments What we will learn Who we want to speak with
Interview commercial
companies with a similar
software product
- General cost breakdowns (i.e.
personnel, overhead) for company with
a similar product
- Rough estimates for actual costs
associated with each bucket
- Global Fishing Watch, Skytruth, Pew
Charitable Trust
- Software companies who sell C2-like
tool to customers like FedEx, UPS, etc
Interview defense
contractors with similar
software in terms of user
base and/or deployment
- General cost breakdowns (i.e.
personnel, overhead) for company with
a similar product
- Rough estimates for actual costs
associated with each bucket
- Palantir, Northrop Grumman, Scitor,
SAIC
Interview experienced VC
personnel with experience
in developing software
companies
-general approach to reasonable cost
assumptions
- ways to approach project
management to reduce variability and
mitigate unexpected costs
-BVP, etc.
Try for ourselves! Where we went wrong, what we did
right
Our future selves

12. Data
- Compile existing data
resources/scope out future ones
Defining C2-F
- Brainstorming what “Command
and Control of the Future” would
be by interviewing younger sailors
Software Development
- Develop flexible data
fusion/analytics algorithms, and an
intuitive UI for millennials
Information Assurance
Prototype Testing/Procurement
Contracting, Acquisitions
Maintenance and Support
USN Strategic Decision
Makers
USN Analysts (N/J2)
USN Operators (N/J3)
Anti-IUU Fishing Enforcers
(USCG, Partner Nations,
etc.)
Anti-IUU Fishing
Stakeholders (NGOs, Legal
Fishing)
(Commercial entities that
use/would benefit from
enhanced C2-type systems)
USN
- Timely, accurate operational decisions
- Decreased time to predict hot spots, ID & differentiate threats
- Increased engagement and effectiveness of younger sailors
- Up-to-date, reliable info in frontline environment
Anti-IUU Fishing
- Reduction in IUU fishing worldwide due to better deterrence
- Better allocation of scarce / expensive interdiction resources
- Widespread engagement of operators, governments, and the public
USN
- Work with fleet sponsor to get C2-F system on fleet needs list
- Ensure C2-F makes it into FIMS database, engage S&T bridge
personnel to talk with key decision makers
- Work with NWDC, ONR S&T, PACFLT LOEs to test solution
- Engage PACFLT N8/N9 shops to implement modular operational
deployment & update pathways
Anti IUU Fishing
- Work with NGOs, gov’t departments, USCG, operators, etc. to find
key influencers/stakeholders
- Deploy solution where possible,
Fixed
- Existing Software tools/APIs, Data
- IA process steps
- Travel for site visits, pilots,
interviews with sailors
- R&D personnel
- AWS & Distributed Computing
- Overhead
Data & Analytics
APIs for accessing data (e.g. API for
Global Fishing Watch, AIS), $$$
needed to access this
Defining C2-F
Ideas/feedback from young sailors
Hackathon w/ Navy and DIUx support
Software Development
AWS, programmers, $$$ for both, SME
on phenomenology of ships, activities
- Need commanding officer to
confirm decision-making benefits
- Need intelligence officers from
ONI / N2 and operators from N3 to
confirm effectiveness of insights
- Need IT approvals to integrate into
systems
- Need support of commercial
partners if we want to leverage their
platforms
-Need support of existing
PMOs/S&T personnel to make sure
we’re not duplicating work
Beneficiaries
Mission Achievement
Mission Budget/Costs
Buy-In
Deployment
Value
Proposition
Key Activities
Key Resources
Key Partners
Data
Skytruth, Pew, GFW, TerraSAR
Defining C2-F
7th,3rd Fleet junior officers, sailors
Software development
Palantir Skytruth, NPS/ONR,
SeaVision, Sea Scout, Universities (e.g.
Vanderbilt), NGOs
Information Assurance
GSA, NWDC
Prototype Testing/Procurement
USFF (NWDC), NAVSEA, SPAWAR,
C7F CIG, PACFLT CSIG, IA contact
Contracting, Acquisitions
-IP Lawyer, subs with gov experience
-DIUx, C3F N8/9, PACFLT N8/N9
Mission: Creating C2-F--Enabling Rapid Decisions from Heterogeneous Data
Information Assurance
Access to personnel to provide
certification / approval
Prototype Testing/Acquisition
Navy testing venue and exercise
(e.g. Trident Warrior), Military Sealift
Command ships, 7th Fleet
experimentation ships and
personnel
Contracting, Acquisitions
Domain knowledge of software
contracting and IP from lawyers,
subs
Variable
- Maintenance and Support
- Integration with existing
systems and processes
IMPROVE USN DECISIONS &
OPS VIA C2-F WITH IMPROVED
DATA HANDLING, UI/UX,
COMMS, AND HARDWARE
(1) Rapid Strategic
Decisionmaking via Improved
Reporting, Coordination, Visibility
(2) Improved Tactical Decision
Making via Timely, Accurate
Information Sharing
(3) More Effective Analysis via
Searchable, Visualizable, Source-
Flexible Data Integration
(Layering & Filtering)
(4) Increased Analyst Bandwidth
via Predictive Intel and Alerts (e.g.
Machine Learning) Flexibly
Applied to Available Data
(5) Improved Collection of
Existing Data Streams
(6) Increasing Morale &
Engagement for Millenial Sailors
ENHANCE ANTI-IUU FISHING
CAPABILITIES
(1) Improved Detection Using
Data Fusion/Analytics
(2) Enhanced Enforcement via
Improved Communication
(3) Lower Barriers to Engaging
Civilians in Reporting IUU Fishing
Activities

13. Cost Flows
Database ($80k)
Analytics Engine
($120k)
Translation (ETLs) ($100k)
AIS VMS Radar SAR Sat
UI ($80k)
Information
Assurance
($240k)
Testing
($480k)
Maintenance
and Support
(VC)
Assume 10 data streams, need
cost validation on streams
$380K $240K $480K $???
Total: $1.1 MM + Var Costs

14. 3 Year Financial/Ops/Funding Timeline
2016 2017 2018 2019
Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2
Cash
Reserves
Phase
ProductGov’tCom’l
Milestones
Q1 Q2Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2Q3 Q4
TRL
1
TRL
2
TR
L 3
TRL 4
TRL 5
TRL 6
TRL 7
TRL 8
TRL 9
POC
Wireframe
Prototype
Beta
Prototype
Marketable
Product
Beta
Prototype
Released to first
customers (<3)
Commercial
Product Launch;
2 contracts
Test in Navy env Navy-wide Deployment Maintenance and Support
V2.0 Commercial
Product Launch;
5 contracts
signed
Initialize
System Development/
Customer Relationship Development Launch at scale
Head
count
4
10
20
50
15
customers;
V2.5 launch
CONTRACT
SIGNED CONTRACT
RENEWED
SBIR/
DIUx
Series A
(In-Q-Tel,
Impact
Investor(s))
2 com’l
contracts
$250k
$0
$1.25M DoD Contract
$2M
$5M

15. Thank you!
Any questions?

16. Products
& Services
- Timely data
- Good UI/UX
for
presenting
data
- Streamlined
reporting process
- Improved
coordination
across ranks
- Utilizes current
tool pipeline
Customer
Jobs
Gains
Pains
Gain
Creators
Pain
Relievers
- Good UI/UX
- Platform
incorporates more
data streams
- Platform is robust
and can handle
drop out of data
streams
- Allocate assets
- Identify, eliminate
threats
- Predict hot spots
- Safety and morale
of team
- Projecting peace,
stability in region
- More informed
decisions
- Faster decisions
- Decisions made
on most up-to-
date info
- Poor quality/lack of
data
- Latency of data ->
insight
Admiral/Strategic Decision Maker
Value Proposition Canvas
Customer persona:
● 3 or 4 star admiral
● Born in late 1950’s
● Have their own office on-base
● Gives out challenge coins
● Responsibility for well-being of
their entire organization (e.g. 7th
Fleet)
● 30,000 ft view thinker
● Spent entire professional career
in Navy (deeply ingrained
culture)

17. Products
& Services
- Contextualized,
object-oriented
database
- Algorithms for
processing,
analyzing data
- Ability to search for trends
across database
- Integration of disparate data
sources
- Automation of data analysis
- Improved UX/UI enabling
greater engagement
- Predictive notifications
- Filtering and layering features
- Tool architecture is flexible
and intelligent
Customer
Jobs
Gains
Pains
Gain Creators
Pain
Relievers
- Compatible data format
- Incorporate multiple
data streams with
existing object-oriented
database
- Integration into current
processes is simple
- Collect & analyze
data
- Communicate
findings
- Piece together
contextualized
awareness
- More actionable insights
- Faster identification & response times
- Easy-to-use
- Information continues to be processed
and visualized even if data streams
are added/dropped (no Christmas
Light effect)
- Incorporation of context is
manual/mental
- Poor quality / lack of data
- Latency of data -> insight
- Long onboarding processes
Analyst (N2)
Value Proposition Canvas
Customer persona:
● 18-35 years old, described as “19-year old from Oklahoma”
● Sits in front of computer 12 hours per day
● Job usually boring with bursts of activity
● Regimented daily process, but schedules could change drastically day-
to-day

18. Products
& Services
- N/A
- Actually a common
operating picture!
- Data is actually synced
across databases
- Tool architecture is
flexible and intelligent
- UI/UX that is much more
intuitive for the millennial
sailor
Customer
Jobs
Gains
Pains
Gain Creators
Pain
Relievers
- No hardware to deploy
so no risk of asset or
personnel loss
- Fewer change orders
- Training and integration
with current processes
is simple
- Utilize assets and
human capital in
order to obtain
ISR data on
adversary or
regions of interest
- Timely and enhanced allocation
and deployment of assets
- Information continues to be
processed and visualized even if
data streams are added/dropped
(no Christmas Light effect)
- Increased engagement
- High manpower, time
- Operator error
- Safety concern for deploying
in unfriendly territory
- Struggle to redeploy systems
on short notice (<12 hours) =
frustration
- Long onboarding processes
Operations (N3)
Value Proposition Canvas
Customer persona:
On Ship
● 18-35 years old
● Follow preset “if-then” procedures
● When passing through high-risk
area, very jumpy
Customer persona:
Head of N3
● 40-55 years old
● General sense that N2 and N6
“work” for them
● Frustrated by changing demands

19. - Crowd-sourced data
collection
- Better COP with partner
nations
- Enable fast response
with better allocation of
assets
Customer
Jobs
Gains
Pains
Gain Creators
Pain
Relievers
- Better intel = more
effective use of assets
- Locate IUU
fishing activity
- Apprehend the
individuals
involved
- Easier to communicate
insights
- Increased buy-in from
partner nations
- Improved deterrence
- Inability to detect “dark”
targets
- Expensive interdiction
vehicles sent to verify IUU
fishing
Anti-IUU Fishing Enforcers (USCG)
Value Proposition Canvas
Customer persona:
Intel (works in MIFC)
● 25-40 years old
● Deep domain expertise - interfaces with
partner nations, NGOs
● Develops internal tools
● May be re-assigned by HR to unrelated roles
Products
& Services
- Contextualized,
object-oriented
database
- Algorithms for
processing,
analyzing data
Customer persona:
Operator (on ship)
● 20-30 years old
● Is law-enforcement presence - can direct
entire Navy ship for related tasks
● Domain expertise or not???

20. Anti-IUU Fishing Stakeholders
Value Proposition Canvas
● PLACEHOLDER
● We are gathering more info on:
○ NGO’s
○ Fisheries
○ Partner nations
○ +other potential Anti-IUU Fishing Stakeholder beneficiaries
Commercial Entities
● PLACEHOLDER
● We are gathering more info on:
○ Fisheries (as a customer)
○ Amazon (also as they look to develop their drone delivery
capabilities)
○ Commercial Shipping companies
○ O&G companies

21. Mission Achievement
Beneficiaries Mission Achievement
Strategic Decision Makers
(Admirals)
- Better, faster decisions despite uncertain information
- Improved COP with analysts + operators = save manpower/bandwidth
resources associated with preparing PPT
- Better understanding of what data contributed to analysis in CUB, and
reliability of that information
Analysts (N/J2) - Predictive analytics based on historical baselines eliminates tedious
elements of workflow → more engagement
- Data aggregation into common database decreases time to insights
Ship CIC Operators (N3) - Up-to-date, reliable information in frontline environment
- Easy to share COP with analysts + strategic decision makers
- Next-generation user interface which is intuitive + leverages familiarity
with commercial tech → more engagement
Anti-IUU Fishing Enforcers
(USCG, w/ support from USN)
- Better allocation of scarce / expensive interdiction resources
- Faster response = better deterrent
Anti-IUU Fishing Stakeholders
(Partner nations, NGOs, legal
fishers)
- Ensure economic + food security
- Reduce # of illegal fishers + associated IUU catch
- Improve working conditions / reduce human trafficking

22. MVP

23. MVP: Modular Intake, Algorithm, and Display

24. MVP: Modular Intake, Algorithm, and Display

25. MVP: Modular Intake, Algorithm, and Display

26. MVP: Modular Intake, Algorithm, and Display

27. Customer Discovery - Get/Keep/Grow Diagram
Awareness Interest Consideration Purchase Keep Unbundling Up-sell Cross-sell Referral
Activity
&
People
- Evangelist &
advocate from
originator Flt
- ???
Corey
Hesselberg,
CDR Jason
Schwarzkopf,
MIOC watch
standers
- Buy-in from
flag officers
- ADM Swift,
VADM Aucoin,
RADM Piersey
- N8/9
- Dave
Yoshihara
(PacFlt N9)
- 7th Fleet ???
- Maintainers
(N6)
- Bob Stevenson
(PacFlt N6)
- 7th Fleet ???
N/A Expanding
COP & intel
extensions /
functionality
within 7th
Fleet
Expanding
user base
within 7th
Fleet
Expanding
tool set to
other fleets
Metrics % people who
have heard of
program
before vs after
*how to
reassess?
# people who
say “we want
this”
Seems
binary… any
recommendati
ons?
# Systems
outfitted
?? ?? ?? # users within
7th Fleet using
tool
# fleets using
tool

28. Map of System Functions and Needs
QUELLFIRE
GCCS (1)
FOBM
STORAGE/
COMMS
CST
GCCS (3)GCCS (2)
STORAGE/
COMMS
STORAGE/
COMMS
Sensors Sensors Sensors
.oth-.json Translator
Visualization
Analytics
Ship-to-Ship Sharing
Long-Term Storage
KEY NEEDS
FUNCTIONS
&
PROGRAMS
SHIP 2 SHIP 3SHIP 1

29. MVP: Software Domain Awareness
Program POC Organization
Function &
Goals
To be used
by whom?
Security
Level Status Contract History Inputs
Technical
Details
CSII
Insight
MTC2
Quellfire
DCGS-N
Increment 2
C2PC
HAMDD
SeaVision
GCCS
EWBM
RC2
(Resilient
C2)

30. Sample In-Development Product: ONR/CTI EWBM Tool

31. MVP (3 weeks ago)

32. MVP (3 weeks ago)

33. MVP (3 weeks ago)

34. MVP (4 weeks ago)
AIS Weather

35. MVP (4 weeks ago)
AIS Weather

36. MVP (4 weeks ago)
AIS Weather

37. Customer Workflow
N2
N3
N2
(“owns”
the
intel)
N3
(“owns”
the
assets)
Ready-To-Use DataDeployment
Data
Acquisition
Data
Analysis
Data
Order/Decision

38. Customer Workflow

39. Key Acquisition Paths
○ Linking in with an existing POR (PMW-150, etc.)
■ Pros: Allocated funding, long-term integration plans
■ Cons: Long timescale, getting in the door
■ POCs: ONI, SPAWAR (Stan Kowalski), Primes
■ Source of Excitement: TBD
○ Rapid Acquisition Pathways (Limited Objective Experiments, Rapid Reaction
Technology Office)
■ Pros: Speed, Close to user, Don’t have to go through Navy (other services
work)
■ Cons: Limited spending authority
■ POCs: 7th Fleet (Jason Knudson), DHS (Chuck Wolf)
■ Source of Excitement: Rapid deployment, changed acquisition model
○ DARPA
■ Pros: Development mindset, existing programs (Insight) that are well-aligned,
deployment authority/capability to pay for deployment to end-users

40. Sample Deployment Path (Software, POR Path)
1. Operational testing to make sure meets military specs (engage SPAWAR for this)
a. Ensure NSA-standard Information Assurance (IA)
i. Lock down system and code
ii. Make sure no category 1,2,3 in code - backdoors, exceptions, etc.
b. Observe appropriate NIST protocols (TBD)
2. First, limited deployment to evaluate functionality (on testbed system or specific asset)
3. Then, if integrated into a POR:
a. Deployed on whatever platform is needed
b. Moves into sustainment phase
c. Think about disposal & replacement--we want continuous improvement!
4. IT installs where required
a. Technical support install software and make sure up and running
b. Maintains communications systems and networks
5. Personnel training for system operation and maintenance
a. CTMs focus on maintaining classified systems & special collections abilities
WE WILL BE GETTING MORE DETAIL ON THIS GOING
FORWARD!

41. Procurement + Deployment Schedule
Activity Timeline Funds People + Resources
Continue Customer Discovery w/ Gov’t May - Sept
2016
$0 Sentinel, H4D cohort,
Navy, USCG, OSD
Customer Discovery with Commercial Entities May - Dec
2016
$0 Sentinel, Teaching
Team, Chris Robinette,
GSB network
Continue Technical Development of MVP May - Dec
2016
$0 Sentinel, AWS(?)
6 month Period of Performance SBIR/BAA/etc tailored to our
MVP is released and awarded to us
Sept - Dec
2016
$0 Sentinel, Rich LeBron,
NWDC(?), DHS(?)
Work on SBIR/other contract and commercial product in
parallel
Jan - June
2017
$250k - $70k Sentinel
Lay framework for DoD acquisition (i.e. build relationships, iron
out process, LOE, etc)
Jan - June
2017
$0 Sentinel, Rich LeBron,
influencers and
acquisition DoD people
Identify and develop relationships/partnerships with key early
adopter/early supporter entities (i.e. commercial companies,
NGO’s)
Jan - June
2017
$0 Sentinel, TBD
Close acquisition and sales deals with DoD and early adopter
commercial companies!
June - August
2017
$1MM -
$3MM, for
each contract
Sentinel, DoD (specifics
TBD), TBD

42. Procurement + Deployment Methods
● This references the italicized line in the schedule
● For Navy, one potential deployment avenue is latch onto a program of record
already in the Fleet Experimentation Info Management System
● We can also leverage SBIR contract as a way to set up for eventual acquisition
● We know that the Coast Guard brings in technology for evaluation (on the path
to acquisition) relatively frequently throughout the year
○ We just need to determine how we insert ourselves into that funnel
● In terms of implementation, we propose an external hard drive that has
historical data pre-loaded in addition to our software solution
○ In addition to the solution, this is beneficial because of bandwidth issues
and memory issues (and our customer discovery has intensely validated
these needs)
○ This avoids having to deal with deploying our software on their hardware
while maintaining modularity and flexibility of our solution
○ It also gives us a fully vetted avenue by which to test and roll out updates in
modular fashion