In Jorge Luis Borges’ parable “On Rigor in Science” (“Del rigor en la ciencia”), a lost empire attains such perfection in the art of cartography that a one-for-one scale map of the empire is produced, laid-out across the land. In time, the creation is understandably deemed useless and subsequent generations ambivalently witness the decay of the map (Borges, 1975). Borges’ critique is that of a science which seeks to perfectly validate, one-to-one, its experiments such that the efforts and impositions of testing and documentation overwhelm the utility and impact of the proofs. Effective inquiry must enact efficiencies between the overhead of validation and the utility achieved from experimental models. This notion sits as the foundation of this proposal regarding business model validation: given the impracticality, and indeed impossibility, of ‘perfect model validation’, what can be considered ‘robust’ from a commercial organizational standpoint? Is it possible to improve upon limitations in current model validation practices, particularly when organizational validation is viewed as an unstructured confidence-building exercise?