Board skills succession canvas

An MVP, or minimum viable product, is the smallest version that your users can actually work with. It is not a cheap version of the full solution. It is a test, built to answer the questions that decide whether the rest is worth building.

1. Pick the riskiest assumption. Here: will nonprofit board governance chairs use it to solve "boards recruit familiar profiles without mapping upcoming needs"?
2. Build only what tests it. One team, one use case, a few core modules. People do the rest by hand for now.
3. Run a paid pilot. Agree the acceptance criteria, input limits and reviewer responsibilities before starting.
4. Measure, then decide. Track coverage gaps clarified and recruitment brief acceptance. Then expand, change course or stop, with evidence instead of opinions.

MVP scope for this solution. Costed pilot: Role design only; no individual candidate ranking. Start with one buyer organization and a bounded set of representative inputs. Implement the first two modules: collect voluntary expertise; map committee needs. Support the third task through an assisted review queue: identify declared coverage gaps. Handle the remaining required functions manually until validated. Include input upload, source references, user correction, a reviewer approval step and export of board succession criteria pack. Authentication, account isolation, deletion controls and basic operational logging are included. Specialized production certification, live write integrations and broader rollout are not included unless explicitly stated.

After the MVP. After paying customers repeatedly accept board succession criteria pack, automate draft role criteria; record board discussion; export recruitment brief. Add one tested read integration, reusable customer configuration and scheduled repeat delivery. Increase supported formats or teams only when evaluation cases and reviewer capacity cover the new scope. Role design only; no individual candidate ranking.

What the build depends on. Current source information, explicit eligibility rules, entity identity checks and inspectable fit reasoning. Sparse evidence limits match quality. Obtain representative authorized inputs, an agreed review rubric and a buyer-side owner. Specific scope: Role design only; no individual candidate ranking.

Pricing to test

Test USD 150-600 monthly for one narrow opportunity feed, or USD 750-2,500 for a bespoke researched shortlist. Price manual verification and custom research explicitly. These are pricing hypotheses. For this buyer, package the first sale around map one board committee and the defined board succession criteria pack. Record actual review effort before offering a recurring allowance. The commercial pilot fee is distinct from the platform development budget.

Message to test

Recruit against explicit future board responsibilities. Demonstrate the result with map one board committee for nonprofit board governance chairs. Use a concrete before-and-after example without promising unmeasured savings.

Where to find buyers

Governance advisors and nonprofit associations

Lead magnet

Map one board committee

The first 30 days

1. Week 1: interview five prospective buyers from nonprofit board governance chairs and inspect how they handle boards recruit familiar profiles without mapping upcoming needs.
2. Week 2: prepare map one board committee using authorized or synthetic material.
3. Week 3: share the demonstration through governance advisors and nonprofit associations and seek one bounded paid pilot.
4. Week 4: measure coverage gaps clarified and recruitment brief acceptance, review delivery effort and ask for a repeat purchase. This is a validation schedule, not a promise that the full product can be built in thirty days.

Paid pilot

Agree the acceptance criteria, input limits and reviewer responsibilities before starting. Run map one board committee and deliver board succession criteria pack. Compare coverage gaps clarified and recruitment brief acceptance with the buyer's current process on comparable cases; include corrections, missed issues and reviewer time. Seek payment and repeat use. Stop or revise the scope if data access, accuracy or unit economics fail.

Success metrics

Coverage gaps clarified and recruitment brief acceptance

Retention and expansion

Build repeat use around board succession criteria pack. Save approved configurations and review decisions with permission, revisit unresolved exceptions and show progress on coverage gaps clarified and recruitment brief acceptance. Offer a recurring volume allowance after repeat demand; expand to adjacent tasks only when the buyer asks and delivery quality remains acceptable.

Why clients would pick it

A maintained niche opportunity dataset and documented relevance feedback, supported by relationships with the intended buyer community. For this concept, accumulate permissioned examples and reviewer corrections around recruit against explicit future board responsibilities. The durable asset is reliable task-specific execution and trusted customer configuration, not access to a general-purpose AI model.

Alternatives and positioning

Manual research, directories, generic databases, referrals and existing opportunity marketplaces. Position this concept around recruit against explicit future board responsibilities. Compare it against the customer's current process on the same representative task. This is proposed differentiation; no exhaustive competitor study or uniqueness claim has been established.

Main delivery costs

Source collection, profile updates, entity resolution, eligibility verification, analyst research and customer feedback review. Initial validation additionally budgets for governance facilitator review. Track model usage, storage, reviewer minutes, exception handling and customer support per accepted deliverable.