Lean canvas versus business model canvas

Since the release of the Lean Canvas, startups have waxed lyrical about its supposed superiority to the Business Model Canvas (BMC), and how it was more 'fit for purpose'.

And I don't disagree with large parts of this argument.

The ability to have Problem-Solution in your primary canvas, is a very powerful tool in binding and matching up with the first 2 of your core 'fits' that a new technology company has to meet, before becoming a thriving, profitable business (check out @EE Digital Capital's previous posts for a refresh!).

But we also need to ask ourselves what we're giving up on the BMC.

For example, Key Partners, Activities, and Resources are important components in the later stage searches for profitability. Otherwise known as the 3rd and final core 'fit': Business-Model fit.

Depending on where your company plays at, there could be some key assumptions and white hot risks that lie under those components that would need validating before its bottom-line can thrive.

A simple remedy would be to bring the BMC back into the fold once you've reached Product-Market fit.

Another favourite of ours is to actually start off with the separate Value Proposition Canvas, which really helps shine a spotlight on the core human-centric needs of your customer. 

It actually helps take your Problem-Solution and Unique Value Proposition exercise on your Lean Canvas, to the next level.

Stay tuned to our next post on why the Value Proposition Canvas is such a powerful tool that helps unify the various frameworks of Design-Thinking, Lean Startup, Jobs to be done, and Problem Statements etc. into one simple but significant exercise.
​

---

​
​𝐈𝐟 𝐲𝐨𝐮'𝐯𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐣𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐢𝐞𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐮𝐬 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐢𝐞𝐜𝐞, 𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐛𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐑𝐒𝐒 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐝!

​𝐏𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐮𝐬 𝐚 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚 @ 𝐄𝐄 𝐃𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥