"Lean Entrepreneurship" post-reading thinking 1

Thinking after reading "Lean Entrepreneurship"

1. Do we need to innovate?
   My own understanding of the definition and interpretation mentioned in the book is:
   Two elements:

   Visions Vision,

Or, there is a goal, but the range is vague and unclear.

• Unable to customize a step by step plan,

Or, there is no precedent can be referenced, can be roughly analyzed what the impact factors, but do not know which factor is the weight factor

The book gives an image of the description, for example, driving from home to the company, the destination is some, but it is not possible to say exactly which parking space, can not give the number of minutes to arrive, or even meet a certain road congestion, may have to bypass the line.

The book also clearly gives the friction between these two factors and the mature corporate system.
**

• Mature Enterprises Need a plan

**
A mature enterprise plan, more like a step by step operation Manual, has a strong alternative, where the "effort" factor can affect the time and quality of project completion, and a new project, more rely on "correct" interpretation of "customer" feedback. (All people who use and will use, as well as the people who buy products)
**

• Growth engine

**
As time accumulates, the user knows more about the output and does attract more customers, but within a unit of time, if the amount of growth, the customer's conversion rate, etc. does not increase significantly, then the plan is not to find the right "engine".
Therefore, in the analysis of customers, you must be careful of the "time" factor.

1. Who is our buyer?

The author has repeatedly emphasized in the book
"hypothesis =" validation = "cognition"
The loop. This cycle requires a physical object to carry, and for the software industry, a demo or prototype is a very natural candidate.

For innovative companies, the author's basic hypothesis is to introduce products to the market, to be used by hundreds of people, to review, to reflect on the actual feedback.

My first reflection is that this cycle and the big process cycle of our company
"Proposal =" prototype = "HQ feedback =" Prototype Evolution "
Much like the interaction between company and HQ personnel, the common pattern is this:
First, we "guess" that HQ might be interested in some feature,
Based on these assumptions, we make a PPT that describes our own ideas,
Based on feedback, develop a demo/prototype,
Then make the changes according to the feedback.

On the surface, this cycle and the circulation mentioned in the book are only refined according to the specific scene.
The core problem is that because there are too many levels, the feedback loop is long, and the evaluation of HQ personnel has been doped with many other factors, and the feedback is characterized by:
?

• Vague, it's very positive or negative.

?

• Extend the feedback loop, synthesize the opinions of your superiors, and then disclose as appropriate

?

• Delayed feedback, for example, in the proposal phase, would suggest a prototype bar

?

• Part of the feedback, in order to maintain good interpersonal relationships and so on, say half

The underlying causes, we still need further traceability, which is related to their respective ecological environment. The list is as follows:

• 1. How to make a demo or prototype
     This question, which appears in my mind earlier. On the one hand, the demo or prototype is a recognized communication medium in the actual project of the company. Some examples in the book are also many, from prototype to research customers.
     However, in the actual operation of the company's project, the negative effect of demo is also very obvious.
     **
• ? Quality issues

**
The distance between prototype and product is still very far, the purpose is much worse, if the use of prototypes to describe the goal is still difficult, quality problems, often become a time when the exchange of the parties "a" or "excuse."
**

• ? Sunk costs

**
In some cases, HQ does not recognize the company's prototype, but considering the manpower problem, think, since already started to do, then do it, so there is no clear objection, leading to the "specious" project, but the second year of Manpower is estimated, in fact, has removed the corresponding manpower.

"Lean Entrepreneurship" post-reading thinking 1