The MVP Conundrum: Why the Minimum Viable Product is Misunderstood (and How to Fix It)

There are few things more polarizing in my profession than the phrase "Minimum Viable Product," or MVP. Just uttering the acronym can evoke strong reactions, ranging from eye rolls to outright disdain.

Here's a taste of what some people are saying:

• “'MVP' is a selfish process, abusing customers so you can 'learn.'”

• “Most MVPs are unfortunately too M to be V…”

• “Instead of MVPs, maybe we should be releasing SMURFs.”

These are just a few examples of the criticisms levied against the MVP approach. As someone who believes in the core concept, I wanted to explore why this seemingly innocuous term generates so much controversy.

Why the Bad Rap?

Launching a "minimal" product into the marketplace has earned a bad reputation for several reasons:

• The Perception of Low Quality: The word "minimum" implies that corners have been cut and the product is subpar.

• Limited Functionality: It suggests that users will be getting a bare-bones experience, lacking essential features.

• Unpolished and Buggy: The term evokes images of a half-baked product riddled with errors and glitches.

• Customer-Centricity Takes a Backseat: The focus on "minimum" can make it seem like the company prioritizes metrics and rapid iteration over genuine customer satisfaction.

The Flip Side: MVPs Done Right

Contrary to popular belief, a well-executed MVP is inherently customer-centric. The primary goal is to get your product in front of users as early as possible to gather feedback and ensure you're building something they truly want and need. This iterative process allows you to validate your assumptions and make course corrections along the way, ultimately leading to a product that delights.

Not for Everyone

It's important to acknowledge that an MVP isn't suitable for every customer. It's best suited for early adopters – those who are eager to try new things, provide feedback, and understand they're engaging with a product still in its early stages. These customers are invaluable partners in shaping the product's future.

My Experience with MVPs

In my field, we're developing entirely new products in a market with established players. Achieving feature parity with products that have been around for decades isn't feasible (or even desirable) from the start. Instead, we focus on delivering a core set of functionalities with innovative features that address specific customer pain points.

We're transparent with our customers about the product's roadmap and acknowledge any existing limitations. That means that the MVP won’t be for everyone. Some customers want to see feature parity. Others are willing to make the trade off between the new features and technology they are getting in the MVP and the older, existing features that they weren’t using anyway. In return, they get to experience cutting-edge technology and contribute to its evolution.

The Branding Problem

Perhaps the issue lies not with the concept itself but with the terminology. The word "minimum" carries negative connotations. Alternatives like "Minimum Lovable Product," "prototype," or "first version" have been proposed, but each has its own drawbacks.

Ultimately, the semantics are less important than the underlying principle: delivering value to customers early and iterating based on their feedback.

Focus on Collaboration

My focus is on building strong relationships with customers who are willing to collaborate and help us create the best possible solutions. This requires releasing products to a targeted audience earlier than a general availability launch.

This is still a struggle for some customers and even some internal teams. Because they are used to the idea of fully-baked solutions with rich features sets out of the gate. I have to remind them all, regularly, that isn’t how modern products are developed and that in the old world it was years, sometimes decades, before a new product was ready to be called generally available.

Instead, by fostering a partnership with early adopters, we can gather valuable insights, refine our product, and ultimately deliver something that exceeds expectations. It just takes time to get there. But, again, the right early adopters are willing to wait.

Beyond the Acronym

The MVP approach, when executed thoughtfully, is a powerful tool for creating products that truly resonate with users. It's about building a feedback loop, iterating rapidly, and prioritizing customer needs above all else.

While the acronym itself may be controversial, the philosophy behind it remains a valuable guide for building successful products in today's dynamic market.

Enjoy what you read? Please consider subscribing to get each edition mailed directly to your inbox.