One-Size-Fits-None: Customizing Curriculum for Mixed-Stage Cohorts

A program manager called me last week in full panic mode.

His cohort was falling apart. Half the founders were checked out during workshops, the other half were frustrated because the content was too basic, and peer learning—the thing he'd been counting on to carry the program—had completely collapsed.

When I asked him to describe his cohort, the problem became obvious immediately.

He had a pre-MVP founder sitting next to a founder with $200K in ARR. A solo founder building a mobile app next to a team of four working on enterprise SaaS. Someone validating their first customer interviews alongside someone who'd already raised a seed round and was scaling their sales team.

"So you've got a mixed-stage cohort," I said.

"Yeah," he replied. "And I have no idea how to make this work."

See, this is the problem most accelerators don't talk about.

They'll tell you they're accepting "early-stage founders." But what does that even mean? Pre-MVP is early-stage. So is post-traction with 100 customers. Those founders need completely different things, but most programs try to serve them with the exact same curriculum.

And it doesn't work.

The Problem with "Average Founder" Curriculum

Here's what happens when you design curriculum for an imaginary average founder:

You pick topics that sound universally useful—customer discovery, go-to-market strategy, financial modeling, fundraising—and you deliver them in a logical sequence.

Week 1: Customer Discovery

Week 2: MVP Development

Week 3: Go-to-Market

Week 4: Financial Modeling

Looks great on paper.

But in practice?

The pre-MVP founder is engaged in Week 1 (customer discovery is exactly what they need) but lost by Week 3 (they don't have a product to take to market yet).

The traction-stage founder zones out in Week 1 (they've already done customer discovery) but perks up in Week 3 (scaling acquisition is their current challenge).

And the founder in the middle? They're partially engaged in everything but not getting the depth they need on any one topic.

Nobody's happy.

This is what I call the "one-size-fits-none" trap—trying to serve everyone with the same content and ending up serving no one well.

Why Mixed-Stage Cohorts Are So Common

Before I get into solutions, let me acknowledge the reality: mixed-stage cohorts are hard to avoid.

Most programs end up with them for a few reasons:

Reason 1: You need the numbers. If you're trying to fill a cohort of 10-15 startups and you only get 8 strong applications from pre-MVP founders, you can't just turn away the traction-stage founders who applied. You need to hit your cohort size.

Reason 2: Diversity is good for the ecosystem. Having founders at different stages can be valuable—if you structure it right. The traction-stage founder has lessons to share. The pre-MVP founder brings fresh energy. Mixed stages create learning opportunities.

Reason 3: "Early-stage" is a fuzzy term. Your application form says "early-stage startups," and applicants interpret that wildly differently. One founder thinks "early-stage" means "I have an idea." Another thinks it means "I've raised a friends-and-family round."

So you end up with a mixed cohort whether you planned for it or not.

The question isn't whether you'll have mixed stages. It's how you'll design for them.

The Core Challenge: Divergent Needs

Let me break down what different founder stages actually need, so you can see why one curriculum doesn't work.

Pre-MVP Founders

(Stage 1)

Where they are: Idea stage or early prototyping. No product in market yet.

What they need:

• Problem validation and customer discovery

• MVP scoping (what to build first, what to skip)

• Frameworks for testing assumptions quickly

• Help avoiding the "build for 6 months in a cave" trap

What they don't need (yet):

• Go-to-market strategy

• Scaling tactics

• Financial modeling for fundraising

Their biggest fear: Building something nobody wants.

MVP-Stage Founders

(Stage 2)

Where they are: Product exists, but no real traction yet. Testing product-market fit.

What they need:

• Product iteration based on user feedback

• Early go-to-market experiments (testing acquisition channels)

• Metrics that matter at this stage (engagement, retention, NPS)

• Help figuring out if they have product-market fit or need to pivot

What they don't need (yet):

• Scaling playbooks

• Team hiring strategies

• Series A fundraising prep

Their biggest fear: Spinning their wheels without finding traction.

Traction-Stage Founders

(Stage 3)

Where they are: Real customers, real revenue (or clear path to it). Ready to scale.

What they need:

• Go-to-market optimization (doubling down on what works)

• Unit economics and financial planning

• Team building and hiring strategy

• Fundraising prep and investor intros

What they don't need:

• Customer discovery 101

• MVP scoping frameworks

• "How to validate your idea" workshops

Their biggest fear: Scaling too fast and breaking everything (or not scaling fast enough and getting passed by competitors).

See the problem?

If you run a "Customer Discovery 101" workshop, Stage 1 founders love it. Stage 3 founders check their phones.

If you run a "Scaling Your Sales Team" workshop, Stage 3 founders take notes. Stage 1 founders panic (they don't even have a product yet).

You can't serve all three with the same content.

The Framework:

4 Models for Mixed-Stage Cohorts

Alright, so how do you actually make this work?

I'm going to walk you through four models I've seen work. Each has trade-offs, and which one you choose depends on your cohort size, team capacity, and program goals.

Model 1: Core + Elective Tracks

How it works:

• Everyone attends "core sessions" that cover foundational skills every founder needs (e.g., storytelling, resilience, stakeholder management).

• Founders choose an "elective track" based on their stage: Pre-MVP Track, MVP Track, or Traction Track.

• Each track has 3-5 specialized sessions per program.

Example:

Core Sessions (Everyone):

• Week 1: Defining your north star and success metrics

• Week 5: Storytelling and pitch fundamentals

• Week 10: Founder resilience and mental health

Elective Tracks:

• Pre-MVP Track: Customer discovery, MVP scoping, assumption testing

• MVP Track: Product iteration, early go-to-market, metrics that matter

• Traction Track: Scaling acquisition, unit economics, fundraising prep

Pros:

• Gives founders tailored content without splitting your cohort entirely

• Maintains some shared experiences (core sessions build cohort bonds)

• Relatively easy to implement with small team

Cons:

• Requires 3-4x the curriculum planning

• Smaller groups in elective tracks (less peer learning within each track)

• Founders might pick the "wrong" track for their stage

Best for: Programs with 15-25 founders and a lean team.

Model 2: Stage-Based Cohorts

How it works:

• Run separate cohorts for different stages (Cohort A: Pre-MVP, Cohort B: Traction).

• Tailor entire curriculum to each cohort's needs.

• Occasionally bring cohorts together for cross-stage peer learning.

Pros:

• Maximum curriculum relevance

• Strong peer learning (everyone's at the same stage)

• Clear positioning ("We're running a Pre-MVP cohort in Q2 and a Traction cohort in Q3")

Cons:

• Requires sourcing enough founders at each stage to fill separate cohorts

• Higher operational complexity (running multiple programs simultaneously or sequentially)

• Less diversity of perspectives within each cohort

Best for: Programs with large pipelines and team capacity to run multiple cohorts per year.

Model 3: Personalized Learning Paths

How it works:

• Identify each founder's stage during onboarding.

• Assign a personalized learning path (custom mix of workshops, office hours, self-paced content).

• Founders attend only the sessions relevant to their stage.

Example:

• Pre-MVP Founder A attends: Customer Discovery, MVP Scoping, Assumption Testing

• Traction Founder B attends: Unit Economics, Fundraising Prep, Scaling Sales

Pros:

• Highly relevant content for every founder

• Founders appreciate the personalization

• Flexible (easy to adjust mid-program if a founder pivots or progresses faster than expected)

Cons:

• Complex to manage (requires detailed tracking and scheduling)

• Weakens cohort bonding (founders aren't in the same sessions)

• Requires robust content library (pre-recorded or modular sessions)

Best for: Programs with strong operational systems and content libraries already built.

Model 4: Layered Curriculum

(My Favorite)

How it works:

• Design curriculum in "layers" where each session has content for multiple stages.

• Teach a framework at a foundational level, then break into stage-specific application groups.

Example Workshop: "Go-to-Market Fundamentals"

Part 1 (Everyone, 30 min): Overview of acquisition channels, CAC/LTV basics, and the go-to-market experimentation mindset.

Part 2 (Breakout groups, 45 min):

• Pre-MVP Group: "Validating Your First Channel" (how to test one acquisition channel with $500 and two weeks)

• MVP Group: "Optimizing What's Working" (how to analyze early experiments and double down)

• Traction Group: "Scaling Profitably" (how to model CAC/LTV and allocate budget across channels)

Part 3 (Everyone, 15 min): Share learnings across groups, Q&A with facilitator.

Pros:

• Maintains cohort unity (everyone's in the same room for part of the session)

• Delivers relevant, stage-specific content

• Creates cross-stage learning opportunities (founders hear what other stages are working on)

Cons:

• Requires skilled facilitators who can manage breakout groups

• More complex session design

• Needs adequate space (or virtual breakout rooms)

Best for: Programs that value cohort bonding and have experienced facilitators.

Practical Tips for Implementation

No matter which model you choose, here are some tactics that make mixed-stage cohorts work better:

Tip 1: Be Transparent About Stage During Onboarding

Don't wait until Week 3 to realize half your cohort is at the wrong stage.

During onboarding, assess:

• Do they have a product in market? (Y/N)

• Do they have paying customers? (Y/N)

• What's their current revenue or user count?

• What's their biggest challenge right now?

Use this info to assign founders to tracks, personalize their learning path, or at minimum set expectations about which sessions will be most relevant.

Tip 2: Offer "Self-Select" Options

Let founders opt into or out of sessions based on relevance.

Example: "This week's workshop is on customer discovery. If you've already completed 20+ customer interviews and have strong signal on your ICP, feel free to skip this and use the time for focused work. We'll also offer office hours for Stage 2+ founders who want to troubleshoot go-to-market experiments."

Founders appreciate the flexibility, and you're not forcing them to sit through irrelevant content.

Tip 3: Leverage Peer Learning Across Stages

Mixed-stage cohorts have one big advantage: cross-stage mentorship.

Your traction-stage founders have been through customer discovery, MVP development, and early go-to-market. They're gold mines of experience for your pre-MVP founders.

Structure peer learning sessions where:

• Stage 3 founders share "what I wish I'd known at Stage 1"

• Stage 2 founders troubleshoot with Stage 3 founders who've solved similar problems

• Stage 1 founders present their customer discovery findings and get feedback from Stage 2/3 founders

This creates value because of the mixed stages, not despite them.

Tip 4: Use Office Hours for Personalization

Your curriculum can be one-size-fits-most, but your office hours should be one-size-fits-one.

If a founder is ahead of or behind the cohort, use 1:1 coaching to fill gaps or accelerate their progress.

Example:

• Stage 1 founder struggling with MVP scoping? Book a 30-min office hour to walk through their roadmap.

• Stage 3 founder ready to hire their first sales rep? Connect them with a mentor who's done it before.

Office hours are your safety valve for mixed-stage challenges.

Tip 5: Measure Satisfaction by Stage

At the end of your program, don't just ask "How satisfied were you overall?"

Ask: "Did the curriculum match your stage and needs?"

If Stage 1 founders rate curriculum 9/10 but Stage 3 founders rate it 5/10, you know where to adjust.

Track satisfaction by stage so you can iterate intelligently.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

Before you go redesign your program, watch out for these traps:

Mistake 1: Trying to serve everyone in every session. You can't. Pick your primary audience for each session and design for them. Offer alternatives for others.

Mistake 2: Splitting the cohort too much. If founders never see each other because they're always in different tracks, you lose cohort bonding. Balance specialization with shared experiences.

Mistake 3: Assuming founders know their stage. Many founders overestimate or underestimate where they are. Use objective criteria (product in market? paying customers? revenue?) to assess stage, not self-reporting.

Mistake 4: Designing for the loudest voices. Your most engaged founders will give feedback. But they might not represent the whole cohort. Survey everyone, especially the quiet ones.

The Bottom Line

Mixed-stage cohorts are hard. But they're also reality for most programs.

You can't serve everyone with the same curriculum and expect great outcomes. But you also can't run five different cohorts simultaneously unless you have unlimited resources.

The answer is thoughtful design.

Pick a model that fits your constraints. Build in flexibility. Leverage peer learning. Measure by stage.

And most importantly: stop pretending all "early-stage founders" are the same.

They're not. And your curriculum shouldn't treat them like they are.

.

.

.

Need help redesigning your curriculum for mixed-stage cohorts? I've built a Mixed-Stage Cohort Playbook with session templates, breakout group structures, and assessment tools to identify founder stages accurately. Download it here.

You might also find the Founder Stage Assessment Tool useful—it's a simple diagnostic that helps you categorize founders and assign them to the right track or learning path. Grab it here.

This post is part of a series on program design and operations for accelerators, incubators, and startup studios. If you found this useful, you might also like: "The Curriculum Design Playbook" and "The Engagement Crisis: Why Founders Check Out."