Delivered work 2020–2021
UrbanKhet COVID pivot
The first-wave delivery response and the later viability decision.
My role Founder: customer commitments, routes, partners and viability.
The experience
Lockdown disrupted business-customer demand and delivery access at the same time. Continuing to accept produce orders required changes to the customers we served and the routes that could reach them.
The first-wave delivery response
I shifted greater emphasis toward direct consumer demand and revised distribution around daily volume. The founder record describes a fifteen-day logistics rebuild, including decentralised delivery collaboration with Amul. A different order mix still needed sourcing and a route that could fulfil it.
As founder, I coordinated the team and customer commitments through that change. The first-wave response was about keeping the service moving under the changed demand and delivery constraints.
The later viability decision
Later, second-wave economics became unsustainable and I wound down the venture. That was a different decision from the first-wave delivery response. The larger venture team and the closure-period team describe different moments.
Restoring operations had not settled the question of whether to continue. I had to return to business viability, rather than assume that a working logistics response was enough.
What continued, and what later stopped
The reported first-wave response was a fifteen-day logistics rebuild and delivery continuity. This is not presented as sustained commercial success: a later founder account records the venture’s wind-down.
The main UrbanKhet case contains the wider operating model. Its wastage statement is not attributed to this pivot.
Sources & technical detail
Original artifacts, detailed tables and source notes.