In this episode of ASSEMBLY Audible, we speak with Trisha Epp, Director of Innovation at Freelancer, about how the Moonshot model works, why federal agencies adopted it early, and what changes when manufacturers move from paying for effort to paying for outcomes.

ASSEMBLY:
So, let’s hear the pitch for the Moonshot program.

TRISHA:
Give us your toughest problem, and we will solve it — or you don’t pay. No consulting firm is going to tell you that. When you hire a consulting firm, it’s kind of like brainstorming together. You converge on the same idea. They give you one viewpoint, and they charge you by the hour whether you solve it or not.

When we run these crowdsourcing problems, we design a challenge around your specific technical problem. It’s not a vague “give me ideas” brainstorm. It’s a rigorous, scoped engineering problem with clear evaluation criteria. Then we send that challenge out to our network. We have 86 million minds around the world.

You’re not picking from three proposals where people say how they’re going to solve your problem. You have dozens or hundreds of working solutions that you’re choosing from, and if one of those works, then you pay.

This is a method we’ve used time and time again with NASA. It’s running innovation challenges and setting forth a prize that can best solve a technical challenge. The result is that you get many people with diverse skill sets and viewpoints bringing solutions to you, as opposed to that traditional RFP.

With an RFP, you issue a call, choose the best proposal given to you, and then you pay whether you get the deliverables you want or not. There might be scope changes, and you have to pay time and materials. You often end up paying more than what you saw in the original proposal.

In an innovation challenge, we scope out the problem ahead of time and define what the solution needs to be. You’re only paying for success.

ASSEMBLY:
I don’t think a lot of businesses have even thought of something like this. Obviously, NASA caught on very early, working with you for as long as they have. Why do you think more people haven’t adopted this approach?

TRISHA:
This has been the unintentionally best-kept secret of the U.S. government, and now we’re trying to spread the word and make it more available to corporations and other governments to deliver these moonshots for new people.

Thank you for helping us get the word out. I’m not sure why more people aren’t doing it. Maybe they don’t know about it. Hopefully, when they hear about it, they’ll try it. We shall see.

ASSEMBLY:
What changes when a manufacturer switches from paying for proposals by the hour to paying only for working solutions?

TRISHA:
It compresses time significantly. If you’re just having your internal R&D team work on it, they’re working in parallel, and there are only so many people to do the work. When you run an innovation challenge, you have hundreds of people working simultaneously on the problem.

You essentially have multiple external R&D teams competing with each other. They’re not collaborating; they’re competing, so they’re developing different models. You’re flipping the risk equation. You’re funding the find instead of funding the search.

In the traditional model, you might get a binder of recommendations but not necessarily a solution. Here, you’re only getting the absolute best work, and only the winner gets paid. The competitive pressure produces quality results.

ASSEMBLY:
Tell us a little bit about the experts you have access to. What makes them different from the experts manufacturers traditionally work with?

TRISHA:
You probably know all of the top suppliers in your industry, and so does everyone else. You’re not necessarily going to get a competitive advantage from that.

By bringing in a new player, you can have something truly unique that hasn’t been seen before. Your established suppliers are trustworthy, and you know what they’ll offer. You want to continue working with them, but there’s an opportunity to move beyond that.

When you work inside an industry, you know how things are done. You don’t necessarily want to reinvent the wheel. But if you come from a different industry and don’t know a wheel exists, you might build a hexacopter.

A solver from an entirely different field brings a different mental model and a new perspective. NASA data shows that the most innovative solutions frequently come from solvers working outside the problem’s primary domain. The currency for problem-solving is diversity of perspective.

With things like the NASA shock propagation challenge, we saw approaches that industry experts told us redefined the art of possible. It’s not that these people are smarter. They just bring new ideas that people inside the industry might not consider because they think it’s never been done that way or that it might seem strange.

Small academic teams or independent individuals don’t have legacy architecture to protect. They’re not trying to sell you an existing product with modifications. They may build something entirely new for you.

ASSEMBLY:
We’re living in an age of real change in manufacturing — automation, AI. Companies are trying to innovate quickly. Where does that innovation generally break down, and how do you fix it?

TRISHA:
In traditional models, only your employees are working on your problems. You have a certain number of people and budgetary limits. There are only so many resources at hand.

If you were going to solve your problems quickly, you probably would have already. You’re likely hiring the best talent you can find.

When you reach outside those walls, you bring in experts from different industries who might not fit your hiring constraints — location, timing, budget — but who have unique perspectives and skill sets.

Innovation breaks down when you don’t have the right people in the room at the right time. Our innovation challenges are research tournaments. They give you many shots on goal. You move away from traditional engineering models to something that produces many potential solutions quickly.

ASSEMBLY:
Is it better for a manufacturer to start with a smaller problem to test the waters, or bring one of their biggest challenges?

TRISHA:
I would challenge anyone thinking about this to go big. We want to deliver moonshots. Technology developed through the Freelancer Moonshot program is helping take humans back to the moon on Artemis II.

This approach has been tried and tested. The risk is low for the company. If we don’t find a solution, you don’t pay. Stop paying for effort and start paying for outcomes.

You could start small, but I recommend choosing something that’s a game changer.

ASSEMBLY:
What’s the cost? Do you need a contract? Can you just go on the website and try it out?

TRISHA:
You could go on Freelancer right now, create a free account, and post a competition. For example, you could say you want a backyard satellite launch system designed and see what comes in.

But if you’re doing something highly technical, talk to me. Email me at trisha@freelancer.com.

Challenge design is critical. We break down the problem, remove industry jargon, define evaluation criteria, and ensure someone from another industry can understand and solve it.

We guide you through the entire process — posting the challenge, media announcements, lead generation, identifying solvers, convening judging panels, administering prizes, and handling IP transfers.

ASSEMBLY:
Manufacturers want to protect trade secrets and proprietary information. How do you address that concern?

TRISHA:
There are a couple of approaches. One is creating an analog problem — similar but not revealing your trade secrets — and then translating the results back.

Another is closed innovation. We curate a specific group of eligible participants, require NDAs, and limit sensitive information to that group.

ASSEMBLY:
How do you maintain positive relationships with suppliers and internal teams while using Moonshot?

TRISHA:
Don’t choose the most exciting problem your team loves. Choose the annoying one that’s been sitting unresolved.

NASA did this with the Orion spacecraft code testing. We found a Norwegian engineer working in Japan who had the niche automotive testing experience needed. The result saved thousands of hours of manual testing.

This isn’t a replacement for suppliers or teams. It positions them better by removing the thorn-in-your-side problems.

ASSEMBLY:
Have you ever encountered a problem you couldn’t solve?

TRISHA:
We haven’t failed to deliver solutions yet. We design the challenge carefully, align incentives, and advertise effectively. We’ve often exceeded expectations.

ASSEMBLY:
Have you worked on a digital twin project?

TRISHA:
We would love to. I’d also love to work on quantum computing problems. Quantum adoption hasn’t caught up to the technology yet, but it’s ready for industrial application.

If you have a digital twin or quantum computing challenge, bring it to me.

ASSEMBLY:
You heard it, folks — bring your problems to Trisha. She’ll solve them all.

Read more about the program.