business model, customer development, hacking for defense, H4D, lean launchpad, lean startup, stanford, startup, steve blank, pete newell, bmnt

1. Acquiforce
Original Problem Statement:
“Enable acquisition
professionals to automatically
develop and coordinate
program documentation.”
Final Problem Statement:
“Enable program managers
to make better, faster
program decisions with
fewer documents.”
104 interviews
Mackenzie Burnett Abhay Agarwal Mike Van Wyk
Support Team: Tom Bedecarre (Mentor), Section 809 (Sponsor)
Team Acquiforce:

3. At first, we thought it was just an automation issue.
Status Quo
● Programs spend on average 7
years emailing around 100+ page
paper briefs written in
WordPerfect to make $250m+
acquisitions
● Only half of the documents
considered to be of high value
“Help us enable acquisition
professionals to automatically
develop and coordinate program
documentation related to a
defense acquisition.”

4. So, we interviewed 104 different stakeholders...
● Action Officers
● Program Managers
● PEOs
● KOs
● SOCOM
● Industry
● From defense contractors…
● ...to four star generals.

5. ...helped by Lean Startup methodology.
Partners Activities Value Proposition Buy-in/Support Beneficiaries
Navy acquisitions leadership
Section 809
Congress (approves of 809
panel recommendations)
Politicking, crafting
recommendations that meet
multiple stakeholders’ needs
Creating
Solving Customer’s Pains
- Automate paperwork
- Best practices are easy to find
- Fewer approvals
- Identification and reduction of
risk
- Complex process is much
more understandable
- Saves individuals money
Customer’s Gains
- More time for strategy and
planning
- Shorter process, closer to
users & resources
Section 809
Congress
IT administrators
Primary: Program Managers
(PMs)
Secondary: DoD leadership,
Operational commanders,
Warfighters
Stakeholders: Other acquisition
professionals, requirements
professionals, and contract
officers. Section 809 Panel. For
deploying software solution,
NSA, internal Marine Corps.
Congress.
Key Resources Deployment
Access/Experience: From team
network, understanding of
internal acquisition process
Technical Skills: Building web
interfaces and maintaining
database of RFP-related
templates
Section 809 report
Naval Constellation Slack
ASN(RNA)
1) Policy/SAMP
2) Platform Dev
3) Intra-naval “startup” with
authorities and latitude
Cost and Operating Plan Mission Achievement
Budget/Cost Timeline
- 1 FTE devoted to IT - 1 year for initial rollout
Published as part of Section 809’s reports, implemented in Sharepoint in Navy/Marines
-80% utilization across assigned program
-50% elimination of process delays

7. What are the core issues really at stake?
Status Quo
“Help us enable acquisition
professionals to automatically
develop and coordinate program
documentation related to a
defense acquisition.”
● Too slow
● Too much paperwork
● Doesn’t utilize existing tools
● Hard to know what
information one needs to
make “better” program
decisions

8. Our team’s journey through the past ten weeks.
Automate
document
creation
Increase quality
of docs
Speed up
approval
chain
scheduling
Use contracting
vehicles
Share best
practices
through better
communication
Streamline and
automate
documentation for
big programs
Use contracting
vehicles
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Make sure all
parties have the
information and
relationships they
need to make
good decisions
Streamline and
automate
documentation
for programs

9. Week 1: Document generation or approval chain?
“Documents aren’t hard to generate; they’re a
pain in the ass and a pain in the ass to get
approved”
- Section 809 Commissioner
“It’s not hard to build documents from scratch.
What’s really a problem is the timeline it takes
to get from person to person at all approval
levels.”
- Program Manager, Navy
“I can get on a general’s calendar in three
months from now and then have him cancel
day of.” - Program Manager, Air Force

10. Week 2 MVP: Is scheduling the problem?
S M T W T F S

11. No, the problem is risk aversion and uncertainty.
“Acquisition folks are afraid of making a bad decision
or not seeing a risk that will ruin the program.” - Navy
SES
“[My boss] would never sign anything unless [they] read
everything [themselves]...Especially given volume and
length of documents -- really complicated acquisitions
stuff...documents would sit on desk for 1-2 months.” - Flag
Aide, CNI
“The acquisitions process suffers from higher-
up’s ability to do...a “pocket veto” — ignore
paperwork as a means to avoid taking
responsibility for a potentially risky decision. In
the DoD, the incentive is not to rock the boat
and not to take risks.”
- Navy Officer

13. Week 3: Meanwhile, chasing down alternatives...

14. ...and better understanding our beneficiaries.
Action
Officers
Contracting
Officers
Operations
Acquisition
Leadership
Requirements
Officers
Budgeting
and Funding
Industry and
Service
Providers
Program
Managers
Congress

15. Week 4: What are the core issues really at stake?
Status Quo
“Help Section 809 enable program
managers to make better, faster
program decisions with fewer
documents.”
● Too slow
● Too much paperwork
● Doesn’t utilize existing tools
● Hard to know what
information one needs to
make “better” program
decisions
Team
Acquiforce

16. What are characteristics of a successful program?
● Flexible requirements that actually reflect user needs
● Constant communication at every level
● Skin in the game, feeling part of the mission
● Transparency through live-updating dashboards
● Social rewards for risk taking and delivering “product-
mission fit”
● It gets killed off if it is actually bad

17. Interview feedback about the communication gap.
“The problem is that these acquisition
programs are too separated from feeling part
of the mission.” - Navy PM
“The teams that are the most successful are the ones that
are in constant communication with their operators and at
every level of the hierarchy.”
- Navy Acquisitions Executive
“I think the biggest issue is lack of communication
(and access to information) across organizations”
- AF Action Officer

18. Week 5: Lack of communication is also a core issue.
Status Quo
“Help Section 809 enable program
managers to make better, faster
program decisions with fewer
documents.”
● Too slow
● Too much paperwork
● Doesn’t utilize existing tools
● Hard to know what
information one needs to
make “better” program
decisions
Team
Acquiforce● Different stakeholders don’t
communicate consistently

19. Lack of communication seeds mistrust between
communities.
“IT’S THEIR
FAULT”
Acquisitions
Requirements Operators
“Superior caste of
anointed ones”
“They don’t know
what they want”
“Can’t build a good
program with bad
requirements”
“Shine the turd and
move on”
“They don’t know
what they’re talking
about”
“Their process is more
important than their
product”
“They never get
anything I actually
need”
“They’re not real acquisitions
professionals, they don’t
know what they’re talking
about”

20. (We only built a triangle. It’s really a
dodecahedron.)
● Resourcers
● KOs
● SOCOM
● High-rank
● Low-rank
● Politicians
● Services
● Contractors
● Industry

21. Week 6: Final MVP Goals
POLICY: Streamline documentation needs according to best practices
● Reduces unnecessary documentation
● Proven track record already (de-risked)
TECHNOLOGY: Automate documentation, live update key info in Sharepoint
● Automates where it makes sense
● Uses existing and implemented technology as much as possible (I3A3,
Sharepoint, MS Office, mIRC)
PROCESS: Formalize “business rules” (use of Sharepoint and inter-stakeholder
communication)
● Addresses “Triangle of Mistrust,” or trust gap between stakeholders
● Democratizes knowledge base of best practices based on data, not
conventional wisdom
● Decreases required meetings that delay progress forward

22. Final MVP: Four Simple Layers
Requirements
Programs

23. Value Proposition for Program Managers
Typical user Jobs to do
▪ 20+ years of
service, O-6
(40+ years
old)
▪ Acquisitions
professional
for 10+
years
▪ Likely spent
~10 years in
the
operating
forces
▪ Develop
program
plan that will
be most
successful
▪ Generate
and
coordinate
program
docs
▪ Supervise
programs on
cost,
schedule,
and
performance
Benefits of current model
Pains of current model
▪ Not risky: When in doubt,
do every document
mentioned in the DoD
5000 and won’t get in
trouble
▪ Familiar: Don’t have to
learn a new tool
▪ Takes a really long time
▪ Waste time on
unnecessary documents
▪ Don’t have critical
program information
▪ Hard to learn from best
practices across DoD
Benefits added
▪ Reduce penalties
for taking risks
▪ Increase rewards
for delivering
what people want
▪ Uses all existing
tools within the
DoD
▪ Reduces time by
months or years
▪ Reduces # docs
▪ Surfaces critical
program info
▪ Learn about best
practices from
across DoD
Solution
▪ Creation: Use
templates or
automatically
generate from
database.
▪ Collaboration:
Use a common
document
repository and a
knowledge wiki.
▪ Communication:
Get Slack/mIRC
notifications and
use real-time chat
to communicate
across all
stakeholders.
▪ Approvals:
Dashboards show
critical info.

24. Weeks 7 -9: Getting further validation from surveys
● “#slack”
● “A shared situational awareness sync button…”
● “A networked program… to ensure that ‘truth data’ is shared…”
● “Communication (and access too [sic] information) across organizations”
● “Lack of acceptance of technology… to collaborate and communicate”
● “...being able to cut out unnecessary documentation.”

25. Looking back at our journey...
Automate
document
creation
Increase quality
of docs
Speed up
approval
chain
scheduling
Use contracting
vehicles
Share best
practices
through better
communication
Streamline and
automate
documentation for
big programs
Use contracting
vehicles
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Make sure all
parties have the
information and
relationships they
need to make
good decisions
Streamline and
automate
documentation
for programs

26. “You have the right vision”
Component Acquisition Executive

27. To the demo!

33. Bottom Line: We need a Darwinian DoD
● We were asked to do something in a paradigm we started
to question
○ We need to develop and acquire technologies that are
precise, responsive, modern and software-defined
● We didn’t want to ossify current system into software
○ Stagnant systems are vulnerable systems
● Instead, we wanted to enable the feedback loops that help
the system learn (i.e. evolve)

34. Our next steps
Submit recommendation to Section 809 Panel to
then go to Congress
Give prototype of an integrated knowledge base,
program dashboard and real-time communication
tool to Navy acquisition leadership

35. Thank you!
Our work would not have been possible without our sponsors at Section 809
(Shirley Franko and Darnelle Fisher) and numerous other supporters, including the
teaching team, TAs (especially Paricha Duangtaweesub), H4D military liaisons, and
our mentor Tom Bedecarre. Additionally, a special thanks to individuals at the
following organizations: