Project Everest

Proposed Experiment
Work Update

[JAN 19] [COLLECTION] Long-term strategy for 'Big Fish'

Big Fish Experiment Framework


"Big Fish" are defined as large organisations with many subsidiaries or individuals that have a large stake in businesses or business property within Dili. This is an experiment framework, not an experiment. The underlying assumption is that the “Big Fish” has individual needs and therefore each experiment should be drafted individually. It provides a number of options of things to consider when designing the experiment. Also, we recommend that a pitch is conducted simultaneously.


We assume that “Big Fish” don’t have a lot of time. Not wasting their time is essential in building our value to the customer. Therefore you must not enter the room at an informational disadvantage and need to be ready to deliver a pitch based on solutions we can scale and can provide.


It is important to note that even if the pitch is unsuccessful, the information we gain from conducting the experiment may lead to a successful pitch down the line. It’s with this in mind that we recommend you perform the experiment before the pitch in order to determine factors such as their willingness to pay. Some of the Green Light metrics have risks that scale with the size of the entity, for example, two pickups a week has less risk than four. Trial periods are inherently high risk and options of scaling our delivered service over time should be explored. Because delivering a large scale, service carries with it a high capital expenditure.


Inherently we need more information to provide a solution, but we need to give a solution to them during the meeting. So we need to validate two assumptions before the experiment can be conducted. These are that we have a repurposing solution that can handle turnover and that we have a comprehensive pricing structure for our service validated by price testing experiments. It may manifest initially as an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), but that ultimately means that we have more information to provide a better solution.

Lean Phase:

Offer testing and prototyping.



  1. We have a repurposing solution for all recyclables

  2. We have comprehensive pricing for our services

  3. They have scale in their waste production.

  4. They have individual needs & will want a tailored solution.

  5. They will want a contract

  6. Recycling is valuable to their business (either financially or as part of an ecofriendly marketing strategy)

  7. That they can afford paid waste collection

  8. (Optional based on business) That they already pay for waste collection services

  9. They have a realistic ability to separate their waste

  10. What they do influences the people around them


Time Box:

1-3 meetings


Success Metric:



  • Cost (affordability)

  • Attitude towards the service

  • Viability (Scale, turnover, capacity).

  • Stability


(When it comes to quantitative data collection ensure you refer to data collection methodologies as posted in Crowdicity)


Green Light-

If all the success point metrics are green then we know that we can provide a service of appropriate size and we have built value with the customer. If these criteria are made it is recommended that a pitch is performed. If one of the green light metrics are not met there is a high chance that there is something that needs to be iterated before we will get a pitch is likely to succeed. It is better to sell a service that we know we can provide than to sell a service we are unready/incapable of providing.


Success point:

100% can afford a service.


100% has a positive attitude towards the service.


100% of the Viability criteria are satisfied.


100% would sign a contract or sign on in some other binding way.

Orange Light-

If up to 2 out of 3 success points are not met (excluding viability) then the experiment can be considered an orange light. If viability success point is not met then it is always an orange light.

Orange Light point:

It may mean ERS needs to:

Scale before we approach again so we are able to meet their needs and the viability criteria.

Have more competitive pricing.

Improve our product or service.

Think of different ways to ensure obligations are honoured.

If orange light is met setting up a meeting in the future is critical, pitch may be performed if appropriate but it is imperative that there is future contact established so we can come back with an iteration that the company is happy with.


Failure Point

If all of the metrics apart from viability are not met then the experiment has proven that this “Big Fish” is not a likely ERS customer with our current offering.


Red Light- Failure Protocol (What is the next move given that you have successfully validated a hypothesis in this instance?)

If the experiment proves that the business is not a likely customer then we should pursue other market sectors.


Experiment build:


Pitch should be conducted at a green light. Pitch should be individually written for each business. It has purposely been left out because each pitch should be individualised.


Key points of consideration:

  • Their time is valuable, and we must endeavor not to waste it.

  • Reliability and professionalism is important to them.

  • There should be an SL at the meeting

  • A pitch deck must be prepared before the meeting.

  • The performing personnel should undergo the pitch workshop prior to conducting the experiment.

  • At the performers discretion the experiment should be followed by the pitch

Key indicators are:

-If interest is shown in the interview.

-If scale hasn’t been met propose a service that ramps up from providing a small service that partially recycles to a service large enough to satisfy the customer.

-If we have the capacity and turnover to provide the service.

-If sustainability is a key part of their marketing strategy.

The questions that this experiment intends to answer are as follows:


Do they think that their choices impact those around them?

  • Community

  • Economic

  • Environmental


Is our solution attractive?


What is a Fair price for our service?


Is our pricing competitive? And is this price align with our costs and a reasonable markup based on the value we are offering.


How much waste do they produce? / Do they have scale in waste production?


What service do they need?

  • Reliability

  • Volume

  • Frequency

  • Internal capacity

  • Turn over

  • Processing speed

  • Bins

  • Education


Can we provide all of these things?


Can they afford collection charges?


Is there financial or their incentive to recycle?


Does recycling improve their public image? Perhaps it’s a marketing strategy they could use?


Can we build enough value for those who do not support recycling to change their perceptions and take on an environmental responsibility as a ‘big fish’


Does recycling have a potential economic impact on their business in the future?


Do they pay more for their current solution than they would for ours?


Can they separate their waste?


Time period of contract?


Clauses of contract?



  • Period

  • Frequency

  • Amount

  • Electronically?

edited on 29th January 2019, 00:01 by Rose Gooding

Rose Gooding Jan 29, 2019

Status labels added: Proposed Experiment, Work Update

Reply 0

Rose Gooding Feb 8, 2019

The reason for this experiment being labelled as a 'work update' as well as a 'proposed experiment', is due to the nature of this experiment having more of a long-term outlook. This should be adopted once the solution part of the lean canvas is validated and there is an end use of plastic validated by the repurpose team. These clients are large scale and from our experience with these types of clients, it needs to be more of a pitch than a conversation. A key aspect, is we have to be sure we can accomodate their scale of waste.

Users tagged:

Reply 0