It’s Time to Play Moneyball: The Investment Readiness Level

Investors sitting through Incubator or Accelerator demo days have three metrics to judge fledgling startups – 1) great looking product demos, 2) compelling PowerPoint slides, and 3) a world-class team.

We think we can do better.

We now have the tools, technology and data to take incubators and accelerators to the next level. Teams can prove their competence and validate their ideas by showing investors evidence that there’s a repeatable and scalable business model. And we can offer investors metrics to play Moneyball – with the Investment Readiness Level.

Here’s how.


We’ve spent the last 3 years building a methodology, classes, an accelerator and software tools and we’ve tested them on ~500 startups teams.

  • A Lean Startup methodology offers entrepreneurs a framework to focus on what’s important: Business Model Discovery. Teams use the Lean Startup toolkit: the Business Model Canvas + Customer Development process + Agile Engineering. These three tools allow startups to focus on the parts of an early stage venture that matter the most: the product, product/market fit, customer acquisition, revenue and cost model, channels and partners.

Lean moneyball

  • An Evidence-based Curriculum (currently taught in the Lean LaunchPad classes and NSF Innovation Corps accelerator). In it we emphasize that a) the data needed exists outside the building, b) teams use the scientific method of hypothesis testing c) teams keep a continual weekly cadence of:
    • Hypothesis – Here’s What We Thought
    • Experiments – Here’s What We Did
    • Data – Here’s What We Learned
    • Insights and Action – Here’s What We Are Going to Do Next

Evidence moneyball

  • LaunchPad Central software is used to track the business model canvas and customer discovery progress of each team. We can see each teams hypotheses, look at the experiments they’re running to test the hypotheses, see their customer interviews, analyze the data and watch as they iterate and pivot.


We focus on evidence and trajectory across the business model. Flashy demo days are great theater, but it’s not clear there’s a correlation between giving a great PowerPoint presentation and a two minute demo and building a successful business model. Rather than a product demo – we believe in a “Learning Demo”. We’ve found that “Lessons Learned” day showing what the teams learned along with the “metrics that matter” is a better fit than a Demo Day.

“Lessons Learned” day allows us to directly assess the ability of the team to learn, pivot and move forward. Based on the “lessons learned” we generate an Investment Readiness Level metric that we can use as part of our “go” or “no-go” decision for funding.

Some background.

NASA and the Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
In the 1970’s/80’s NASA needed a common way to describe the maturity and state of flight readiness of their technology projects.  They invented a 9-step description of how ready a technology project was.  They then mapped those 9-levels to a thermometer.NASA TRL

What’s important to note is that the TRL is imperfect. It’s subjective. It’s incomplete.  But it’s a major leap over what was being used before.  Before there was no common language to compare projects.

The TRL solved a huge problem – it was a simple and visual way to share a common understanding of technology status.  The U.S. Air Force, then the Army and then the entire U.S. Department of Defense along with the European Space Agency (ESA) all have adopted the TRL to manage their complex projects. As simple as it is, the TRL is used to manage funding and go/no decisions for complex programs worldwide.

We propose we can do the same for new ventures – provide a simple and visual way to share a common understanding of startup readiness status. We call this the Investment Readiness Level . 

The Investment Readiness Level (IRL)
The collective wisdom of venture investors (including angel investors, and venture capitalists) over the past decades has been mostly subjective. Investment decisions made on the basis of “awesome presentation”, “the demo blew us away”, or “great team” is used to measure startups. These are 20th century relics of the lack of data available from each team and the lack of comparative data across a cohort and portfolio.

Those days are over.

Hypotheses testing and data collection
We’ve instrumented our startups in our Lean LaunchPad classes and the NSF I-Corps incubator using LaunchPad Central to collect a continuous stream of data across all the teams.  Over 10 weeks each team gets out and talks to 100 customers. And they are testing hypotheses across all 9 boxes in the business model canvas.

We collect this data into a Leaderboard (shown in the figure below) giving the incubator/accelerator manager a single dashboard to see the collective progress of the cohort. Metrics visible at a glance are number of customer interviews in the current week as well as aggregate interviews, hypotheses to test, invalidated hypotheses, mentor and instructor engagements. This data gives a feel for the evidence and trajectory of the cohort as a whole and a top-level of view of each teams progress.

leaderboard moneyball

Next, we have each team update their Business Model Canvas weekly based on the 10+ customer interviews they’ve completed.

canvas updates moneyball

The canvas updates are driven by the 10+ customer interviews a week each team is doing. Teams document each and every customer interaction in a Discovery Narrative. These interactions provide feedback and validate or invalidate each hypothesis.

disovery 10 moneyball

Underlying the canvas is an Activity Map which shows the hypotheses tested and which have been validated or invalidated.

activty updates moneyball

All this data is rolled into a Scorecard, essentially a Kanban board which allows the teams to visualize the work to do, the work in progress and the work done for all nine business model canvas components.

scorecard update moneyball

Finally the software rolls all the data into an Investment Readiness Level score.


At first glance this process seems ludicrous. Startup success is all about the team. Or the founder, or the product, or the market – no metrics can measure those intangibles.

Baseball used to believe that as well. Until 2002 – when the Oakland A’s’ baseball team took advantage of analytical metrics of player performance to field a team that competed successfully against much richer competitors.

Statistical analysis demonstrated that on-base percentage and slugging percentage were better indicators of offensive success, and the A’s became convinced that these qualities were cheaper to obtain on the open market than more historically valued qualities such as speed and contact. These observations often flew in the face of conventional baseball wisdom and the beliefs of many baseball scouts and executives.

By re-evaluating the strategies that produce wins on the field, the 2002 Oakland A’s spent $41 million in salary, and were competitive with the New York Yankees, who spent $125 million.

Our contention is that the Lean Startup + Evidence based Entrepreneurship + LaunchPad Central Software now allows incubators and accelerators to have a robust and consistent data set across teams. While it doesn’t eliminate great investor judgement, pattern recognitions skills and mentoring – it does provide them the option to play Moneyball.

if you can’t see the video above click here

Last September Andy Sack, Jerry Engel and I taught our first stealth class for incubator/accelerator managers who wanted to learn how to play Moneyball.

We’re offering one again this January here.

Lessons Learned

  • It’s not clear there’s a correlation between a great PowerPoint presentation and two minute demo and building a successful business
  • We now have the tools and technology to take incubators and accelerators to the next step
  • We focus on evidence and trajectory across the business model
  • The data gathered can generate an Investment Readiness Level score for each team
  • the Lean Startup + Evidence based Entrepreneurship + LaunchPad Central Software now allows incubators and accelerators to play Moneyball

Listen to the podcast here [audio]

Download the podcast here

17 Responses

  1. very interesting and educational.

  2. How many of the 500 completed the entire curriculum? Did they have MVPs before starting? Did they pivot along the way? Was the success measured against how others do their programs?

  3. Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    Thank you!! 🙂 Thank you!!

    James Dean Waryk

    = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


  4. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant piece of information! And an excellent write-up too. Congrats to Steve Blank and team.

    The metric of “Investment Readiness Level (IRL)” is a game-changer. I like the tool of the “Investmeter” as well as its 9-step scale which functions as an activity and progress chart. I believe that the Investmeter would change the language of how entrepreneurs and startups plan, execute, and manage their Lean Startup projects. And it’s all for the better … for entrepreneurs, startups, investors, and the rest of society.

  5. I like to think of the Investment Readiness Level as a ladder. Startups can climb one step at a time base on validated hypotheses, take a few steps back down the ladder (pivot) or return to the base and start again (reboot the startup with a new idea / vision). Hoping to try this out with secondary school students in 2014. Cheers, Ashley.

  6. I use Moneyball as an organizing metaphor for doing strategic communications work with the start-ups in MaRS Innovation’s portfolio.

    One of my decks that applies this concept to the knowledge translation world is here:

    In essence, if you can’t define a win or a run in your start-up’s terms, you have no business getting in the game.

  7. Hee, hee, hee. Pegging any metric on a NASA diagnostic tool is doomed to failure. What organization is more dysfunctional than any in our economy? The Federal Gvt. and its organs, NASA, US Army. Have any of these agencies ever developed a technology on-time, on-budget, that actually worked without another $100B to fix it?

  8. […] Interestingly enough Steve Blank (originator of all this lean stuff) recently wrote a post on a new metric, The Investment Readiness Level: […]

  9. Steve, one of the happy results of Customer Development is the acceleration of consumer-generated revenue: by listening to potential customers and designing a product that fits their actual problems, pre-sales are more likely. This consumer-generated revenue may delay the need for outside investment, or at least increase valuations and reduce dilutions for the founding entrepreneurs.

    But by labeling your “thermometer” as the Investment Readiness Level, you are potentially reversing these happy results. And as much as you declare that the IRL refers to the investment of time, money, and aguish from the founders, we all know that, especially in Silicon Valley, too many in your audience will only see the IRL as relating to VC investment.

    My point: I hope you consider changing the title of the metric, perhaps to something like Revenue Readiness Level, in order to encourage students to continue their focus on customer-generated revenues.

  10. […] invite you to read the full text on his website and engage in a dialog about it.  Could this give angels a much better way to pick the winners […]

  11. Reblogged this on Max Gorbatenko.

  12. […] eliminate great investor judgment, pattern recognition skills and mentoring, we’ve developed an Investment Readiness Level tool that fills in these missing […]

  13. […] Blank has done precisely that in developing a new tool that he calls the Investment Readiness Level (IRL).  The IRL looks like […]

  14. […] eliminate great investor judgment, pattern recognition skills and mentoring, we’ve developed an Investment Readiness Level tool that fills in these missing pieces. Background about the Investment Readiness […]

  15. […] Osterwalder shows how to do this with the Progress Board, a tool that includes a version of my investment readiness level thermometer to track […]

  16. Reblogged this on Kripa writes and commented:
    Lots to process and even more to practice but tough to debate this data driven approach to developing a concept into a business.

  17. I think that investment readiness level process is the most valuable to startup founders, so they can use the tool to rate their own company before they go out and start raising money. This is particularly important for startups outside Silicon Valley where angel and venture capital funds are scarce. What’s missing from this article is benchmark: what’s the average investment readiness level for the companies that were successful in getting seed investment. I would also like to see the breakdown between readiness level, seed investment raise and geographic location. I would speculate that readiness level has to be higher in the location where venture capital is not easily accessible.
    Here’s my take on a typical profile for a successful new startup that is venture capital ready

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: