Hacking for Defense: Utilizing the Mission Model Canvas to Drive Impact
Students Learn How to Validate Hypothesis to Solve National Defense Problems
The following is an excerpt from Chapter 1 in the NEW textbook Hacking for Defense, a graduate-level course taught at more than 70 colleges and universities worldwide and on three continents. More than 2,000 students have successfully completed its program.
The Hacking for Defense (H4D) course offers a hands-on experience for students to solve real-world problems for the Defense and Intelligence communities. The course provides a platform using the Lean Startup methodology that allows for interdisciplinary teams of students to collaborate and develop solutions that address pressing national security issues. To effectively deliver solutions, teams must have a clear understanding of the problem they are trying to solve and the stakeholders they are serving. Over the course of an academic term, student teams interview dozens of stakeholders to learn what problem is being experienced and by whom. Tracking the insights gleaned from all of these interviews can be confusing. This is where the Mission Model Canvas (MMC) comes in.
The MMC is a framework for understanding the nine (9) most critical aspects a team must identify and validate to successfully solve a problem, which is done by developing and delivering a solution. By utilizing the MMC, teams can ensure that solutions are mission-driven and focused on meeting the needs of those they serve.
Mission Model Canvas
The Mission Model Canvas was created by Steve Blank, Pete Newell and Alex Osterwalder. Like the Business Model Canvas, the Mission Model Canvas (MMC) is a visual tool used to help teams create, test and track hypotheses necessary to delivering value to government stakeholders.
Creating, testing, and tracking hypotheses is essential to ensure that interviews have a distinct purpose. Many assume that interviewing a specific group of stakeholders, or beneficiaries, (e.g., Marine infantrymen, F-35 pilots, etc.), will lead to deep insights about them. Experience has shown, however, that the interviews need focus in order to gain the insights needed to understand a problem well enough to develop a solution. Put simply, developing hypotheses and knowing what you want to learn before interviewing is essential. Each team should know exactly which hypotheses are being tested in the interviews, so the feedback can be framed in a meaningful way (test hypotheses to generate learning). The MMC is the tool that tracks these hypotheses to ensure that Beneficiary Discovery isn’t compromised by having a bunch of random conversations.
Using the MMC consists of a 3-step cycle:
Develop hypotheses and record them in the MMC boxes (by answering the prompts in the boxes illustrated above)
Validate/invalidate hypotheses through by interviewing and experimenting with relevant stakeholders (e.g., “people will want feature X” or “beneficiaries will want to deploy the solution because…”)
Update the MMC hypotheses based on the feedback received during interviews.
Each cycle of testing hypotheses propels the team closer to knowing exactly what the problem is, who will benefit from a solution, why they need to solve it, and how to deliver the solution. The cycle is repeated until the hypotheses is validated/invalidated.
The Value of the MMC
The MMC serves as a hypothesis scorecard. Initially untested hypotheses are entered into the MMC. Testing those hypotheses during interviews will transform hypotheses into facts. Those facts will then be recorded in the MMC so a team’s knowledge of the problem can be tracked.
For instance, one hypothesis might be that Marine infantrymen are the primary beneficiary. After validating the hypothesis over a series of interviews, “Marine infantryman” as a beneficiary becomes a concrete fact on the MMC under the Beneficiary box. On the other hand, if Marine infantrymen are invalidated as a beneficiary, Marine infantrymen no longer need to be considered and the team can move onto testing other beneficiary hypotheses. In both cases, the MMC is used to track what the team thinks they know versus what they know as a fact. Initial hypotheses will not be perfect. Importantly, they are a jump-off point for having intentional interviews.
Tips for Filling out your MMC
As mentioned, the Mission Model Canvas is used to track the current understanding of the problem, what value is needed to solve the problem, potential solutions, and how to build and deliver that solution. Here are some example prompts to complete a Mission Model Canvas:
Beneficiaries: For whom are you creating value? For each beneficiary, what gain does the solution provide or what pain does the solution solve?
Value Propositions: What value can be offered to Beneficiaries to help solve their problem? (Hint: value propositions are not products, policies, or finished solutions. They are the value that a product might provide. For instance, a Value Propositions is not toothpaste (product), but it could be 1) cleaning teeth; 2) making teeth whiter; 3) freshening breath. The goal is to first determine the underlying Value Proposition and then determine the solution to delivering that value. Per the example, there are several products that would deliver a teeth whitening solution. The trick is to first identify the value.
Mission Achievement: What goals does solving the Beneficiary’s problem help their organization achieve? For instance, if a new shovel was delivered to an infantryman that helps dig foxholes better, how does that impact the organization? Why should the leadership care about solving a Beneficiary’s problem? (More on this in Chapter X)
Buy-In & Support: Who can support the Value Propositions to the end-user? Who influences whether the solution is adopted? (e.g., organizational gatekeepers, contracting officers, leaders, policymakers - be specific)
Deployment: What will it take to deploy the solution into widespread use?
Key Activities: What are the unique activities that will enable the solution to deliver the value propositions to beneficiaries?
Key Resources: What resources are required to complete Value Propositions, maintain Buy-in & Support, and Deployment?
Key Partners: Which of these activities can be outsourced to others? (e.g., defense contractors, colleges and universities, companies)
Mission Cost: What are the costs required in delivering the value proposition? Is the cost proportionate to the value derived in Mission Achievement?
If answering the above questions is difficult, or those seeking to transition interview feedback into insights, consider filling in the following templates as a team.
[The Problem Statement] was written to achieve [list goals].
The Problem Sponsor has observed that the problem has led to [shortcomings], which is impacting the achievement of [important mission goals].The problem might be solved by delivering [value] to help [beneficiary] achieve [measurable metrics of success].
By [delivering X value] for [these beneficiaries] it will achieve [this outcome/mission achievement].
This data is substantiated via [a specific measure of interview feedback, quantitative data, or qualitative insights].
The [quantitative/qualitative insight] concludes [this hypothesis to be true].
Remember, the MMC organizes hypotheses to learn, to know who to talk to, and, ultimately, answers the question why. Use the MMC to focus interviews by testing 2-3 specific hypotheses during each interview. Using the MMC to intentionally test and learn is foundational to delivering a solution.