Thanks for reaching out. Be sure to check us out on LinkedIn for all of our current news and announcements.
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
Teams love touting “zero-to-one” chops, yet most skip the ambiguous discovery work that has the greatest leverage. We split the journey in two: -1 to 0, where we interrogate problems, run lean tests, and earn conviction; and 0 to 1, where builders craft an MVP and prove traction. Naming the early phase shines a spotlight on risk-reducing activities, sharpens hiring, and keeps capital pointed at ideas that deserve it.
We’ve embedded -1 to 0 into our venture-studio model because it disciplines both time and treasury. Treating discovery as its own stage influences how we staff projects. Explorers – people comfortable invalidating hypotheses and dumping their own work – own the early cycle. They document findings, synthesize evidence, and hand a concise brief to builders who excel at moving from scoping documents or clickable demos into real software. This hand-off prevents the all-too-common scenario where execution talent inherits half-baked concepts.
The clarity pays off when we engage founders. Candidates who claim “I thrive at 0 to 1” now explain which activities they master: are they the researcher who cold-calls prospects to test assumptions, or the engineer who turns validated flows into production-ready releases? That transparency reduces mismatches and speeds decisions on equity splits, timelines, and team composition.
For us, -1 to 0 isn’t extra bureaucracy – it’s the cheapest time to be wrong. Every hour spent questioning assumptions now salvages weeks of rework later. The payoff compounds across a portfolio: fewer false starts, tighter burn rates, and a culture that celebrates learning over shipping for its own sake. Once a concept graduates to 0 to 1, we attack it with confidence, knowing we’re solving a problem that customers have already confirmed matters.
Q: What exactly triggers the move from -1 to 0 into 0 to 1?
A: We transition when we’ve validated a clear problem, captured a unique insight, and produced evidence via interviews or lightweight prototypes that users find the proposed solution valuable.
Q: Can the same person handle both stages?
A: Sometimes, but most people lean toward either exploratory research or focused building. We staff to strengths so each phase gets the mindset it needs.
Q: How do we avoid analysis paralysis in -1 to 0?
A: Set explicit time boxes and learning goals. If a problem isn’t compelling within that window, we archive the idea and move on.
Check out this piece on why if you don’t start by validating a problem, you’ll likely fail.
Read the full article on Focused Chaos
