Interviewing this week allowed us to to confirm our understanding of the problem as well as test some of our hypotheses from the first week . Everyone we interviewed was pretty much on the same page as the people from the previous week in terms of a solution, which really helped us feel confident in beginning to create a MVP. We learned that we needed to branch out from initial questions to try and get some different information as well as interview people from different fields.
As a team, we came to a consensus that filling out the Value Proposition Canvas Model prior to an interview does not better our understanding of our interviewees. Prior to starting our very first interviews, we decided as a team that we would go into an interview already having the knowledge and the consideration of this type of information about the beneficiary in the back of our minds. We find that this process was slowing us down, as well as beginning to become redundant. This action before an interview would cause us to lose time from receiving answers and important content from our interviewees, as well as prevention of generating follow-up questions. The loss of a defined focus during the interview, developed by the preparation of a Value Proposition Canvas Model prior to an interview, could drag out an interview; this is an issue for the kind of individuals we are contacting, since they have very complex and inconsistent schedules.
*Team A-ha! Moments!*
Giavanna Verdi
One key insight from my interview with Contact 8 was the mention that the prototype should be easily operable when individuals have gloves on, and not have to worry about removing them. Contact 8 explained a real-life scenario when an individual had to remove his gloves in order to properly turn a radio knob on a technological device, and due to the extreme cold weather, the individual got frostbite on his hands. On that personal story, Contact 8 continued to explain that the prototype should be able adaptable to multiple types of terrain, such as surviving jumps out of planes, and multiple types of temperatures, with cold temperatures at high altitudes being an example that was provided in the interview.
Josh Talley
While talking with contact 13 I thought it was extremely eye opening when he began to explain the term multi-spectral intelligence gathering device. During the past few weeks i’ve been trying to find a term for what we are trying to create and contact 13 hit the nail on the head. The problem requires a device that can feel out for several types of data like sound, vibrations, heat, intercepting radio waves and different ways to see through the solution whether it be day or night time. Contact 13 explained that the problem could occur in any setting so to prepare for that the solution should be equipped to deal with it all.
Marshall Grimard
The two key insights, one from our mentor, and one from Contact 18 which I had this week were certainly enlightening. Our mentor gave us a lot of good points to consider, but the greatest point he made this week was not to narrow our minds to a single platform, but to keep our view of the problem at this stage at a “30,000 foot” level. In this track, he also mentioned that we should consider using a platform which “fits in” within the environment in order to maintain the element of surprise. The interview with contact 18 also yielded a couple excellent points, but the main “a-ha” moment with them was that military academies do have research divisions which could potentially be a source of technologies which have been developed and could be used. This grants us a source of tech solutions in order to give us an idea of the technology already out there, as well as for possible incorporation into our own solution.
Cassandra Hagstoz
This week I spoke with Contact 10 who was extremely helpful due to his previous work with the 75th Rangers as well as being a JMU alumn. He pretty much was looking for exactly what the other rangers wanted however, he was really keen on the idea of a self-destruction mechanism. He reiterated the fact that the device should be reusable to the point where they can take it on multiple missions but if they needed to double it as a weapon they would like that option. The most insightful moment was that we were worried about the sound and speed of the platform and contact 10 gave really good insight on the fact that although the quieter the better, it is not a make or break issue. The Rangers are already giving up their surprise by using it therefore it isn’t something we need to focus on/ worry about to intensely, which allows us to focus on other aspects of the device.
Michael Zurn
All of my interviewees for this week were able to provide inciteful information. Contact 9 provided me with a general understanding of the overall processes of military acquisition, but more importantly, provided some current platforms that are being introduced into the military along with some that are beginning to be weeded out. An example is ATAK is starting to replace PEWS. Contacts 11 and 12 were interviewed together and the main outcome of this was having the idea of possibly putting a sniffing device on the solution. This could be important because an enemy position needs to have communications with the outside world. The final interview with Contact 18 provided some new insight on the entire acquisition process for the military services. I also learned what methods are currently used to obtain new systems as fast as possible so that may be the track to look down once the device’s design in complete.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pjeqh7mOYHs
JMU X-Labs
4-VA
