agentleFS
deciqAIdeciqAI/knowledge-skills/business-model-canvas/SKILL.md

business-model-canvas

Skill13 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Activate when: user says "business model canvas," "BMC," "Osterwalder canvas," "what's our business model," "map this business," or asks to evaluate/design/pivot/compare a business model before raising capital. Do NOT activate when: no customer segment exists yet (redirect to first-principles first); or the question is purely operational (which CRM, which feature to ship). More: deciqai.com/s/business-model-canvas

10 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use value-proposition-canvas.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • fahadnariSkill

    value-proposition-canvas

    Creates a Value Proposition Canvas mapping customer needs to product value Use when: value proposition canvas, value prop canvas, customer jobs, jobs pains gains, value map.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    When NOT to use: no customer named yet (do first-principles first) · canvas done and nothing validated since · purely operational decision …

    line 21
  2. Distinctive:

    Check fit against When to Use / When NOT to use.

    line 31
  3. Distinctive:

    Run the Business Model Canvas Audit — map all nine blocks, tag each claim, surface the riskiest assumptions, name next-week experiments.

    line 41
  4. Very specific:

    After mapping: tag every claim VALIDATED/ASSUMED/DEPENDENT · name the 1–2 ASSUMED claims that would kill the business · design the smallest …

    line 55

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Business Model Canvas

Overview

A business creates, delivers, and captures value through nine interlocking blocks (Customer Segments, Value Propositions, Channels, Customer Relationships, Revenue Streams, Key Resources, Key Activities, Key Partners, Cost Structure). The canvas maps each block and exposes which claims are specific enough to be tested vs. still wishful thinking. Introduced by Osterwalder (HEC Lausanne, 2004); popularized in Business Model Generation (Wiley, 2010).

Compose: first-principles to clarify genuine dependencies · occams-razor to compare models · inversion to find the block whose failure kills the model · second-order-thinking to trace block cascades.

When to Use

Apply when: designing a new business · evaluating an existing business for block-level risk · considering a pivot · comparing against incumbents · before raising capital · sizing an AI-native model's economics under AI capex / usage-based margins / AI-native competition (does the foundation-model provider's pricing or its own product roadmap sit in your Cost Structure and Key Partners?).

When NOT to use: no customer named yet (do first-principles first) · canvas done and nothing validated since · purely operational decision · you will fill it in but never test it.

Coaching Novices (Adaptive Front Door)

  • Engine mode: user has a concrete case → run The Process directly.
  • Coach mode: user is unfamiliar or has no concrete case → guide step by step.

In Coach mode, respond one step at a time. Each [WAIT] is a hard stop — output only that step's question, then stop.

  1. One-line what-it-is: nine blocks map how a business creates, delivers, and captures value — so you can see which claims are testable and which are wishful thinking.
  2. Check fit against When to Use / When NOT to use. If no customer named, redirect to first-principles.
  3. Elicit their real business — one specific segment and one specific value prop before opening the other seven blocks.

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

  1. Walk the nine blocks one at a time in dependency order (Segments → Value Prop → Channels → Relationships → Revenue → Resources → Activities → Partners → Cost). Force specifics.

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

  1. Close by naming the single block with the most unvalidated assumption and the next-week experiment to test it.

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

The Process

Run the Business Model Canvas Audit — map all nine blocks, tag each claim, surface the riskiest assumptions, name next-week experiments.

StepBlockKey question
1Customer SegmentsSpecific who (not "consumers") — multi-sided businesses list each side
2Value PropositionsWhat the customer gets in their own units (time/money/anxiety/status) — not features
3ChannelsFive phases: awareness, evaluation, purchase, delivery, after-sales
4Customer RelationshipsWhat relationship does each segment expect? (self-service / personal / community)
5Revenue StreamsModel + price + why they pay — willingness-to-pay must be testable
6Key ResourcesOnly the small distinctive set that enables the value prop
7Key ActivitiesOnly what must be done distinctively well to deliver the value prop
8Key PartnersNamed, with role and replacement risk
9Cost StructureNamed drivers, fixed vs. variable; value-driven or cost-driven?

After mapping: tag every claim VALIDATED/ASSUMED/DEPENDENT · name the 1–2 ASSUMED claims that would kill the business · design the smallest next-week experiment for each.

Output template

# Business Model Canvas Audit: <business name>
| Block | Specifics | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Customer Segments | … | VALIDATED/ASSUMED/DEPENDENT |
| Value Propositions | … | … |
| Channels | awareness/eval/purchase/delivery/after-sales | … |
| Customer Relationships | … | … |
| Revenue Streams | model + price + why they pay | … |
| Key Resources | … | … |
| Key Activities | … | … |
| Key Partners | named + role + replacement risk | … |
| Cost Structure | fixed/variable drivers | … |

Multi-sided check: [list each side's segment + value prop + revenue]
Load-bearing ASSUMED claims: 1. … 2. …
Next-week experiments: To test <claim>: <smallest experiment by <date>>
Comparison to incumbents: [block-by-block diff vs. closest competitor]

→ Method in Action: Southwest Airlines (1971 → ongoing) · Nespresso's Razor-and-Blades Pivot → 2026 lens: Mapping an AI-Native Startup (2024–2026) — usage/outcome revenue, compute as dominant variable cost, the foundation-model provider as both key partner and key risk

Industry Canvas Packs

DomainLoad-bearing blockTypical ASSUMED claimCommon failure
B2B SaaSValue Propositionstime-to-value short enough to survive the pilotscaling sales before validating segment fit
Two-sided marketplacesCustomer Segments (×2)cold-start liquidity on the harder sidemapping one side's canvas, skipping the other's Segments/Value Props/Revenue Streams
DTC consumerChannelsCAC below contribution margin at scalepricing set before any willingness-to-pay evidence; Channels covering purchase but not after-sales
Professional servicesKey Resourcesthe specific people who deliver the value prop are retainable and replicableselling capacity that walks out the door; Cost Structure left as "salaries" without utilization drivers

Contribute a pack for your domain — see the template at the repo root.

Applying It Well

  • Generic words are theater. Replace "consumers," "online," "low cost" with specifics before a block counts as filled.
  • The blocks must compose. A great Value Prop + Channels that can't reach the segment is not a business model.
  • Multi-sided is the rule; the canvas points to experiments. Platforms have multiple Segments/Props/Revenue Streams — skipping a side breaks the canvas. Surface the 1–2 ASSUMED claims that would kill the business and test them next week.
  • Compare block-by-block to incumbents. Identical canvas to a competitor = worse-positioned version of theirs.

→ Primary sources: references/sources.md

Common Rationalizations

[D] = designed upfront | [O] = observed in real use. [O] entries are more valuable.

Fake moveReality
[D] Canvas as decoration — filled in after strategy is setCanvas is for finding the strategy. Retrofitted = wall poster.
[D] Generic segments — "consumers," "businesses," "everyone"Generic segments → generic canvas → untestable claims.
[D] Value Prop = feature listFeatures = what the product does; value prop = what the customer gets in their own units.
[D] Single-sided thinking in a multi-sided businessPlatforms have multiple Segments/Value Props/Revenue Streams — skipping a side breaks the canvas.
[D] Cost Structure left vague ("low" / "high" without driver names)"Low cost" without named drivers is a wish, not an answer.
[D] Revenue Streams without willingness-to-pay evidencePricing without evidence is ASSUMED, not validated.
[D] Key blocks as generic lists · No experiment planOnly distinctive-set items belong; without experiments, the canvas is a hypothesis.
→ Add [O] entries here after each real use — paste the actual failure patternWhat went wrong and why

Red Flags / Verification

  • Canvas filled after strategy was set (decoration) · Segments contain "consumers"/"everyone" · Value Props are a feature list
  • Revenue Streams give price without willingness-to-pay evidence · Key blocks list generic inventory · No multi-sided check on a platform
  • No ASSUMED claims labeled · No next-week experiment named for load-bearing assumptions
  • All nine blocks specific (not generic) · Channels covers all five phases · Each claim tagged VALIDATED/ASSUMED/DEPENDENT
  • Canvas compared block-by-block to at least one incumbent's

Part of deciqAI Knowledge Skills — 253 open-source thinking skills that make rigor executable for AI agents. The same skills power every deciqAI agent, which runs them autonomously to operate your company. See it run → https://www.deciqai.com/s/business-model-canvas · Built by deciqAI · github.com/deciqAI · Contributions welcome.

Agents: latest version & machine-readable metadata → https://www.deciqai.com/s/business-model-canvas.json

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.