Skip to main content

A Startup Cockpit for the Proof-of-Concept

Abstract

More and more innovative new ventures step away from the traditional business plan centred model and follow the “Lean Startup Idea”. This paper introduces a measurement tool – the Startup Cockpit – that helps startups on their way from an idea-based organization to a company with a profit-generating business model. It is based on the Customer Development model of Blank (Blank SG (2006) The four steps to epiphany. San Mateo. cafepress.com), the Lean Startup methodology of Ries (Ries (2011) The lean startup: how today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. Crown Business, New York), and Maurya (Maurya A (2012) Running lean – iterate from plan A to a plan that works. Second edn. O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol), the Lean Analytics concept of Croll and Yoskowitz (Croll A, Yoskowitz B (2013) Use data to build a better startup faster. O’Reilly Media, California), and Faltin’s ideas (Faltin G (2013) Brains versus capital: entrepreneurship for everyone – lean, smart, simple. Stiftung Entrepreneurship, Berlin, (2008) Kopf schlägt Kapital. Carl Hanser Verlag, München). All of those authors introduced a number of crucial processes and meta-principles that promote successful business model development for startups.

In an innovation-driven market a business plan is not always the instrument of choice in the early days of a business. Many Internet startups have established a key performance indicators (KPI) oriented process and successfully refined their business model or, as Faltin calls it, the entrepreneurial design (cp. Faltin G (2008) Kopf schlägt Kapital. Carl Hanser Verlag, München). This paper analyses the foundations of the Lean Startup process: the discovery-driven planning and the hypotheses-driven planning approach and the application of those principles in Ries’ Lean Startup methodology and Blank’s Customer Development model. A business plan still is a necessary tool. But it comes later in the startup process, after the proof-of-concept.

In our research we found patterns in the usage of numbers/metrics/KPIs to support the business model design process – a Startup Cockpit seems to be within reach. But it is often said that “every entrepreneur is unique”. That makes it difficult to define a “one-size-fits-all”-set of KPIs that helps startups from different industries and in different development stages. Nevertheless, a generic Startup Cockpit can be outlined. But according to our findings it has to be adjusted to each startup’s situation. The main determinants are the development stage, the business model, the strategy, and the financing structure.

We prefer the term “cockpit” over “dashboard” as the later has become directly linked to online business models whereas our approach is to find a generic approach to manage the process from an idea to the proof-of-concept. In the same way every airplane pilot and every car driver only tracks a selected set of information such as speed, engine temperature, and gasoline, an entrepreneur has to think about and find those elements of information that best reflect the core of his or her business model to achieve a better understanding of the process to the proof-of-concept.

Sven Ripsas, with support from Birte Scharper and Steffen Tröger

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Blank, S. G. 2006. The four steps to epiphany. San Mateo. cafepress.com

  • Blank, S. G., and B. Dorf. 2012. The startup owner’s manual – The step-by-step guide for building a great company, First Edition. Pescadero: K&S Ranch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, B., and P. Vlaskovits. 2010. The entrepreneur’s guide to customer development. E-book Kindle version self-published. http://custdev.com/

  • Cristensen, C. 1997. The innovator’s dilemma – When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Croll, A., and B. Yoskowitz. 2013. Use data to build a better startup faster. California: O’Reilly Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. 1985. Innovation and entrepreneurship: Practice and principles. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenmann, T., E. Ries, and S. Dillard. 2011. Hypothesis-driven entrepreneurship: The lean startup. Harvard Case Collection December 2011

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst & Young. 2012. Globalizing venture capital.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faltin, G. 2008. Kopf schlägt Kapital. München: Carl Hanser Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Faltin, G. 2013. Brains versus capital: Entrepreneurship for everyone – Lean, smart, simple. Berlin: Stiftung Entrepreneurship.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faltin, G., and S. Ripsas. 2011. The entrepreneurial design as the core aspect of Entrepreneurship. Unpublished english version based on “Das Gestalten von Geschäftsmodellen als Kern des Entrepreneurship”. Working paper institute of management Berlin 04/2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., and A. Strauss. 2012. The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research, 7th edn. Originally published 1967. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannon, P. D., and A. Atherton. 1997. Small firm success and the art of orienteering: the value of plans, planning, and strategic awareness in the competitive small firm. Journal of small Business and Enterprise Development 5(2): 102–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek, F. A. 2002. Competition as a discovery procedure. Trans. from the original Hayek, 1968 by Marcellus S. Snow. The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 9–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrmann, B. L., M. Marmer, E. Dogrultan, and D. Holtschke. 2012. Startup ecosystem report 2012, Part One. http://cdn2.blog.digital.telefonica.com.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Startup-Ecosystem-Report-2012.pdf

  • Kane, T. 2010. The importance of startups in job creation and job destruction. Kauffman Foundation Research Series: Firm Formation and Economic Growth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R., and D. Norton. 1992. The balanced scorecard–measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review 70: 71–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I.M. 1973. Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, F.H. 1921. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston: Hart, Schaffner & Marx/Houghton Mifflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marmer, M., B. L. Herrmann, E. Dogrultan, and R. Berman. 2012. Startup genome report extra on premature scaling. http://gallery.mailchimp.com/8c534f3b5ad611c0ff8aeccd5/files/Startup_Genome_Report_version_2.1.pdf. Accessed 08.09.2014.

  • Mauer, R., and D. Grichnik. 2011. Dein Markt, das unbekannte Wesen: Zum Umgang mit Marktunsicherheit als Kern des Entrepreneurial Marketing. In Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, Special Issue on Entrepreneurial Marketing, 59–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurya, A. 2012. Running lean – Iterate from plan A to a plan that works, Second edn. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maurya, A. 2013a. Innovation accounting. http://practicetrumpstheory.com/innovation-accounting/. Accessed 15.07.2014.

  • Maurya, A. 2013b. 3 rules to actionable metrics in a lean startup. http://practicetrumpstheory.com/2010/07/3-rules-to-actionable-metrics/. Accessed 01.04.2013.

  • McClure, D. 2007. Startup metrics for pirates: AARRR!. http://500hats.typepad.com/500blogs/2007/09/startup-metrics.html. Accessed 15.08.2014.

  • McGrath, R. G., and I. C. MacMillan. 1995. Discovery driven planning. Harvard Business Review 73: 44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. 1990. The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strategic Management Journal 11(3): 171–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H., und J. Waters. 1985. Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management Journal 257–272. Chichester: Wiley Online Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller-Stewens, G., und C. Lechner. 2011. Strategisches Management, 4. Aufl. Stuttgart: Schäffer Poeschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullins, J., and R. Komisar. 2009. Getting to plan B: Breaking through to a better business model. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osterwalder, A., and Y. Pigneur. 2010. Business model generation: a handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ries, E. 2008. Principles of lean startups, presentation for maples investments. Online available at: http://www.startuplessonslearned.com/2008/11/principles-of-lean-startups.html

  • Ries, E. 2011. The lean startup: How today’s entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripsas, S., and H. Zumholz. 2011. Die Bedeutung von Business Plänen in der Nachgründungsphase. Corporate Finance Biz 07/2011, 435–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripsas, S., and S. Tröger. 2014. Deutscher Startup Monitor 2014. Berlin: Published by KPMG Deutschland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ripsas, S., J. Vossler, and C. Tegge. 2013. Lean business model development for startups – The case of Instagram. Unpublished working paper. Berlin School of Economics and Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. 2008. Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S., and N. Dew. 2005. New market creation through transformation. Journal of Evolutionary Economics 15(5): 533–565, Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • SBA Office of Advocacy. 2012. Frequently asked questions. U.S. small business administration, Office of advocacy. Online available at: http://www.sba.gov/advocacy/. Accessed 17.07.2012.

  • Sosna, M., R. Trevinyo-Rodriguez, and S. Ramakrishna Velamuri. 2010. Business model innovation through trial-and- error learning: The Naturhouse case. Long Range Planning 43: 383–407, Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stähler, P. 2001. Geschäftsmodelle in der digitalen Ökonomie: Merkmale, Strategien und Auswirkungen. Academic Dissertation, University of St. Gallen HSG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H., M.J. Roberts, and H.I. Grousbeck. 1994. New business ventures and the entrepreneur. Boston: IRWIN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, D. W., P. N. Shamdasni, und D. W. Rook. 2007. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, Aufl. 2., Sage Publications, California, Thousand Oaks.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sven Ripsas .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH

About this entry

Cite this entry

Ripsas, S., Schaper, B., Tröger, S. (2015). A Startup Cockpit for the Proof-of-Concept. In: Faltin, G. (eds) Handbuch Entrepreneurship. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05263-8_21-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05263-8_21-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-05263-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Referenz Wirtschaftswissenschaften

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

  1. Latest

    A Startup Cockpit for the Proof-of-Concept
    Published:
    14 November 2017

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05263-8_21-2

  2. Original

    A Startup Cockpit for the Proof-of-Concept
    Published:
    29 February 2016

    DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05263-8_21-1