Thanks for this—it looks great! Just a few thoughts.
1. How much time did you invest in the entire process?
2. Impact measurement: Overall, I like the idea of the multi-touch attribution model useful but it’d come down to how you operationalize it. In particular, I wonder whether the expected impact of an individual is sufficiently operationalized in a way that’s going to be useful and pragmatic for you. For Future Academy, we found some combination HEA and 80K’s IASPC quite useful (although we haven’t seen the process to completion yet).
3. Time allocation across programs: Do you have forecasts from previous iterations of the programs that can inform the time distribution?
4. The Lean start-up BML seems like a good model to me. Perhaps batching the different phases in a quarterly way by front-loading the build and then have the rest of the quarter (time period) be about the measure and learning part.
5. Failure-modes: Great that you did the analysis. The “importance” section appear too conservative to me (e.g., it seems as if you’re ranking it on scale of 25).
Thank you for the detailed feedback! I’ll quickly try to answer:
Without looking it up I would say 200-250 hours in total (including a list of exploratory programs that we didn’t publish)
We’re currently looking more in detail at the impact model and I‘m curious to know more about your approach. As we write we’re still unsure if we can come up with something that is operational.
We could probably get time estimates from previous programs but didn’t see that this would be helpful as we decided to pursue them anyway.
My feeling would be to scope the build process by defining the minimal features and not by time. Similarly different programs will yield useful measurements on different time scales. But we’re still not at the point where thought much about this.
I see this can be confusing as the third column is just multiplying the first two. We then only used the product for ranking. We probably should have stated this in a clearer way.
Weakly held opinion that you could be investing too much into this progress. I’d expect to hit diminishing returns after ~50-100 hours (though have no expertise whatsoever)
I agree that there are diminishing returns and wouldn’t see too much value in continuing at this point. The time spent on strategy (about three weeks for the two of us) was also the first time working in this new role, getting to know each other and getting to know stakeholders in the community. As we wanted to lay the basis for the next years of the organisation, this didn’t seem overly long, especially as we could present the document to the board within the first month of my joining.
Thanks for this—it looks great! Just a few thoughts.
1. How much time did you invest in the entire process?
2. Impact measurement:
Overall, I like the idea of the multi-touch attribution model useful but it’d come down to how you operationalize it. In particular, I wonder whether the expected impact of an individual is sufficiently operationalized in a way that’s going to be useful and pragmatic for you. For Future Academy, we found some combination HEA and 80K’s IASPC quite useful (although we haven’t seen the process to completion yet).
3. Time allocation across programs:
Do you have forecasts from previous iterations of the programs that can inform the time distribution?
4. The Lean start-up BML seems like a good model to me. Perhaps batching the different phases in a quarterly way by front-loading the build and then have the rest of the quarter (time period) be about the measure and learning part.
5. Failure-modes:
Great that you did the analysis. The “importance” section appear too conservative to me (e.g., it seems as if you’re ranking it on scale of 25).
Thank you for the detailed feedback! I’ll quickly try to answer:
Without looking it up I would say 200-250 hours in total (including a list of exploratory programs that we didn’t publish)
We’re currently looking more in detail at the impact model and I‘m curious to know more about your approach. As we write we’re still unsure if we can come up with something that is operational.
We could probably get time estimates from previous programs but didn’t see that this would be helpful as we decided to pursue them anyway.
My feeling would be to scope the build process by defining the minimal features and not by time. Similarly different programs will yield useful measurements on different time scales. But we’re still not at the point where thought much about this.
I see this can be confusing as the third column is just multiplying the first two. We then only used the product for ranking. We probably should have stated this in a clearer way.
Weakly held opinion that you could be investing too much into this progress. I’d expect to hit diminishing returns after ~50-100 hours (though have no expertise whatsoever)
I agree that there are diminishing returns and wouldn’t see too much value in continuing at this point. The time spent on strategy (about three weeks for the two of us) was also the first time working in this new role, getting to know each other and getting to know stakeholders in the community. As we wanted to lay the basis for the next years of the organisation, this didn’t seem overly long, especially as we could present the document to the board within the first month of my joining.
That sounds very sensible
Thank you. All those comments make sense to me. I just messaged you privately to request your email so I can share our impact documents.