A founder should cut a continent-sized promise when the evidence beneath it is still thin. One working customer workflow in Accra carries more weight because it shows who has the problem, what they do today, and why they might pay for a better way.
At 11:47 p.m., Kojo was sitting on the edge of a hotel bed in Kigali, moving between two slides on a laptop balanced beside a paper cup of cold coffee. Kojo is a composite founder, drawn from the decisions I have seen early-stage teams face. He had flown in to meet investors and operators with six weeks of runway left.
One slide showed a map of Africa covered in coloured markers. The heading promised a platform built for businesses across the continent. The other showed a single workflow from Accra: a small distributor receiving an order, checking stock in a spreadsheet, confirming payment in a messaging app, and copying the details into another system before dispatch.
The map looked ambitious. The Accra workflow looked small.
By morning, Kojo needed a story strong enough to earn a second conversation. If the room dismissed him as another founder using a large market to cover a narrow product, the trip would end with polite handshakes and the same runway problem waiting at home.
He deleted the map.
A large market cannot carry an unproven product
I understand why founders reach for geography. A map makes the opportunity feel visible. Add population figures, smartphone adoption, and a few country flags, and a young product can appear larger than its current evidence.
The problem begins when the audience asks one level deeper.
Which business buys first? What breaks often enough for the owner to change behaviour? Who enters the data? Who approves the payment? What happens when the internet drops or the person responsible keeps using the spreadsheet?
A continent cannot answer those questions. A workflow can.
Kojo’s Accra slide showed the exact point where an order stalled. The owner could see available stock in one place, payment confirmation in another, and the delivery status somewhere else. One missed update could send goods before payment was clear or leave a paid order sitting until the customer called.
That scene gave the product something the map could not provide: a reason to exist on Monday morning.
The smaller claim created harder questions
Deleting the map did not make the pitch easier. It removed the comfortable distance between the product and the evidence.
Once Kojo centred one workflow, every weakness became easier to see. The customer still relied on a spreadsheet. Staff could bypass the new process. The automation handled the common path, while unusual orders still needed a person. A second customer might organise the same work differently.
Those caveats belonged in the conversation.
Founder authority comes from showing how a decision survives contact with reality. I trust a founder more when they can say, “This part works, this part still needs a person, and this is what the next customer must prove.” That gives me something I can examine.
It also protects the roadmap. If Kojo had sold the room on continental coverage, he would have created pressure to add countries, integrations, and edge cases before the first workflow had earned repeat use. With limited runway, that kind of promise becomes an expensive queue of obligations.
The same tension appears when a team has several functioning capabilities and little time to establish demand. In Kelechi’s Three Working Features. Six Weeks to Prove One., the difficult move is choosing which proof deserves the remaining runway. Breadth feels safer until each extra claim creates another thing the team must defend.
Proof should travel before the product does
A specific workflow can start in Accra and still matter in Kigali, Lagos, Berlin, or Atlanta. The useful question is what travels with it.
The city name alone does not make the evidence transferable. The underlying constraint might: fragmented records, manual confirmation, unclear ownership, or a repeated handoff that costs the business money when it fails.
That distinction matters for founders building across African, European, and US markets. Local operating conditions differ. Buying authority differs. Payment habits, procurement expectations, and support needs differ. A founder can acknowledge those differences while still showing a repeatable problem.
Kojo’s revised pitch made a narrower claim: this workflow worked for one kind of distributor in Accra, and the Kigali meetings would test whether the same costly handoff appeared elsewhere.
Now the trip had a job.
He did not need the room to believe in an entire continent. He needed one person to recognise the workflow, challenge the assumptions, and help him determine whether the problem repeated.
The morning after the deletion
The next morning, Kojo opened with the Accra workflow. An operator in the room interrupted before he reached the product screen and asked who confirmed payment when the owner was away.
That question was more useful than praise for the market size. It exposed a role Kojo had treated as fixed and gave him something concrete to investigate after the meeting.
The pitch still could have failed. A working workflow does not guarantee repeat demand, a second market, or a durable company. It does, however, give the room a real decision to discuss.
Before your next pitch, find the slide making the largest promise. Put it beside the smallest piece of evidence you can defend under questioning. If the evidence tells the stronger story, let the map go.
At 11:47 p.m., Kojo’s deck became smaller. By morning, his next test had become clear.
Comments
No comments yet.