Learning Launch 

 My challenge is one I ’ve already experienced , but without the advantage of   design thinking tools . Instead of applying design thinking to a current   challenge , I will apply them in retrospect to a startup company I worked for ,   which had trouble finding product market fit . We were a well - funded and   intelligent group with passion for cyber security . We had big ideas and the   ability to build , so that is exactly what we did . We built whatever we thought   was cool and then immediately tried to sell it . Our key performance   indicator of a particular feature was revenue . If we had conducted a   learning launch to test our cool ideas , we would have found product market   fit much faster and without gratuitously wasting a lot of money . A learning   launch would have tested our key assumptions about what our customer   was looking for in a cyber security product and how to build these features   in a way that provided maximum possible valuable to the end user . 

 Our initial approach to finding product market fit was to build , market , and   attempt direct sales with whatever feature set we had ( or were promising   existed ) at the time . A learning launch would have required us to form   hypotheses and test them with potential customers . Instead , our test via   sales tactic actually damaged our brand value and resulted in a very   unfocused product . I feel a mistake that design thinking and a learning   launch would have solved for us is that we were chasing money instead of   solutions . If we had begun with our focus on what problem we were solving   rather than what are people willing to pay for , we would have been able to   build a much more focused product that more people would be willing to   pay for . For instance , we had built a suite of tools system administrators   can use to mitigate their organization ’s exposure to cyber threats . What we   found among early sales leads and customers was that these tools were   tool complex or did not produce enough perceived value and consequently   were abandoned . We really did n’t understand the problems our target   customers were trying to solve . 

 Placing many small bets quickly was something we did well . We could   iterate and pivot extremely quickly . And while we did listen to our   customer ’s feedback , it was mostly focused on usability and design , rather   than how effectively it is at solving their problem . Part of the reason for this   is that the field of cyber security is a moving target . We never know where   the next threat will come from or how to stop it . So , to say we solve one   problem and solve it well leaves our product sorely lacking in the eyes of   our customers . It was n’t until many months into building and pivoting that   we discovered a potential panacea for our customer ’s woes , education .   95 % of successful cyber security attacks are the result of human error   ( although I would argue that at the end of the day 100 % of successful   breaches are the result of human error ) . This was the problem that needed   solving , human error . Once we focused on providing a focused education   about cyber threats an organization faces , and did it better than anyone   else , sales quickly followed . I would argue that we could have reached this   point months earlier than we did if we had used a learning launch . 

 The insight gained from a learning launch would have helped us   understand that it was n’t one problem our customers were facing , it was all   problems . Beginning with looking at what solutions exist regarding how   organizations protect themselves against cyber threats , immersing   ourselves in this information to find the common denominators and trends   would have allowed us to understand that education was the critical   component that was missing . We were particularly adept at imagining what   could be and then building a scalable solution . And I was particularly good   at creating a product that wows . But the rest of the process did not matter   because our core assumptions were not tested or validated . Our eventual   insights were proven correct as we were later acquired by our largest   competitor . 

 I think about how we could have done better to find product market fit more   quickly and more effectively on a daily basis . It haunts me in fact , which is   why I ’m grateful for the design thinking tools this course has empowered 

 me with . My fellow entrepreneurs , as myself , did not have much respect for   structured thinking tools , formality , process , or procedure . It is only now that   I understand that these things do not exist for their own sake . They are   powerful frameworks developed by experts who have devoted their lives to   solving the problem of how to solve problems more effectively . If I could   start again I would have insisted on more testing up front , a closer look at   what exists to gain an understanding of how customers are solving their   problems and recognizing if a gap exists , improvement could be made , or   the current process could be scaled more effectively . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: 
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Learning Launch 

 My challenge is one I ’ve already experienced , but without the advantage of   design thinking tools . Instead of applying design thinking to a current   challenge , I will apply them in retrospect to a startup company I worked for ,   which had trouble finding product market fit . We were a well - funded and   intelligent group with passion for cyber security . We had big ideas and the   ability to build , so that is exactly what we did . We built whatever we thought   was cool and then immediately tried to sell it . Our key performance   indicator of a particular feature was revenue . If we had conducted a   learning launch to test our cool ideas , we would have found product market   fit much faster and without gratuitously wasting a lot of money . A learning   launch would have tested our key assumptions about what our customer   was looking for in a cyber security product and how to build these features   in a way that provided maximum possible valuable to the end user . 

 Our initial approach to finding product market fit was to build , market , and   attempt direct sales with whatever feature set we had ( or were promising   existed ) at the time . A learning launch would have required us to form   hypotheses and test them with potential customers . Instead , our test via   sales tactic actually damaged our brand value and resulted in a very   unfocused product . I feel a mistake that design thinking and a learning   launch would have solved for us is that we were chasing money instead of   solutions . If we had begun with our focus on what problem we were solving   rather than what are people willing to pay for , we would have been able to   build a much more focused product that more people would be willing to   pay for . For instance , we had built a suite of tools system administrators   can use to mitigate their organization ’s exposure to cyber threats . What we   found among early sales leads and customers was that these tools were   tool complex or did not produce enough perceived value and consequently   were abandoned . We really did n’t understand the problems our target   customers were trying to solve . 

 Placing many small bets quickly was something we did well . We could   iterate and pivot extremely quickly . And while we did listen to our   customer ’s feedback , it was mostly focused on usability and design , rather   than how effectively it is at solving their problem . Part of the reason for this   is that the field of cyber security is a moving target . We never know where   the next threat will come from or how to stop it . So , to say we solve one   problem and solve it well leaves our product sorely lacking in the eyes of   our customers . It was n’t until many months into building and pivoting that   we discovered a potential panacea for our customer ’s woes , education .   95 % of successful cyber security attacks are the result of human error   ( although I would argue that at the end of the day 100 % of successful   breaches are the result of human error ) . This was the problem that needed   solving , human error . Once we focused on providing a focused education   about cyber threats an organization faces , and did it better than anyone   else , sales quickly followed . I would argue that we could have reached this   point months earlier than we did if we had used a learning launch . 

 The insight gained from a learning launch would have helped us   understand that it was n’t one problem our customers were facing , it was all   problems . Beginning with looking at what solutions exist regarding how   organizations protect themselves against cyber threats , immersing   ourselves in this information to find the common denominators and trends   would have allowed us to understand that education was the critical   component that was missing . We were particularly adept at imagining what   could be and then building a scalable solution . And I was particularly good   at creating a product that wows . But the rest of the process did not matter   because our core assumptions were not tested or validated . Our eventual   insights were proven correct as we were later acquired by our largest   competitor . 

 I think about how we could have done better to find product market fit more   quickly and more effectively on a daily basis . It haunts me in fact , which is   why I ’m grateful for the design thinking tools this course has empowered 

 me with . My fellow entrepreneurs , as myself , did not have much respect for   structured thinking tools , formality , process , or procedure . It is only now that   I understand that these things do not exist for their own sake . They are   powerful frameworks developed by experts who have devoted their lives to   solving the problem of how to solve problems more effectively . If I could   start again I would have insisted on more testing up front , a closer look at   what exists to gain an understanding of how customers are solving their   problems and recognizing if a gap exists , improvement could be made , or   the current process could be scaled more effectively .
### Output: 