There’s a lot of discussion and confusion about what is and isn’t a minimum viable product (MVP).
Worse, many execs have latched on to the term without really understanding what truly constitutes an MVP — many use it as a buzzword, and as a synonym to mean a completed version 1.0 ready to be sold to all customers.
Buzzwords are meaningless. They represent lazy thinking. And using “MVP” to mean “first market launch” or “first customer ship” means you’re back to the old waterfall, traditional project-driven software development, sales-focused approach. If that’s your approach, fine. Just don’t call what you’re delivering an MVP.
On the flip side, lots of folks in the enterprise world, including in product management, over-think the term. It gets lost in the clever nuances of market maturity, and a long entrenchment in the world of release dates and feature-based requirements thinking.
Many folks think of MVP as simply the smallest collection of features to deliver to customers. Wrong. It’s not.
The problem with that approach is it assumes we know ahead of time exactly what will satisfy customers. Even if we’ve served them for years, odds are when it comes to a new product or feature, we don’t.
Now, the challenge with the concept of a minimum viable product is it constitutes an entirely different way of thinking about our approach to product development.
It’s not about product delivery actually — in other words, it’s not about delivering product for the sake of delivering it or to hit a deadline.
As such, it puts customers’ problems squarely at the center, not our solution.
Reality check: Customers don’t care about your solution. They care about their problems. Your solution, while interesting, is irrelevant.
So if we’re going to use the term “MVP”, it’s important to understand what it really means.
Fortunately, all it takes to do that is to go back to the definition.
Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is a term coined by Eric Ries as part of his Lean Startup methodology, which lays out a framework for pursuing a startup in particular, and product innovation more generally. This means we need to understand the methodology of Lean Startup to have the right context for using terms like “MVP”. (Just like we shouldn’t use “product backlog” from Agile as a synonym for “dumping ground for all possible feature ideas”.)
Eric lays out a definition for what is an MVP:
“The minimum viable product is that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort.”
Eric goes on to explain exactly what he means (emphasis mine):
… In fact, MVP is quite annoying, because it imposes extra overhead. We have to manage to learn something from our first product iteration. In a lot of cases, this requires a lot of energy invested in talking to customers or metrics and analytics.
Second, the definition’s use of the words maximum and minimum means . It requires judgment to figure out, for any given context, what MVP makes sense.
Let’s break this down.
1. . This means it must be something delivered to customers that they can use.
There’s a lot that’s been written about creating landing pages, mockups, prototypes, doing smoke tests, etc., and considering them as forms of MVPs. While these are undoubtedly worthwhile, and certainly “lean”, efforts to gain valuable learnings, they are not products. Read Ramli John‘s excellent post on “A Landing Page Is NOT A Minimum Viable Product“.
A product must attempt to deliver real value to customers. So a minimum viable product is an attempt — an experiment — to deliver real value to customer.
Which leads us to…
2. An MVP is viable. This means it must try to tangibly solve real world and urgent problems faced by your target customers.
So it’s not about figuring out the smallest collection of features. It’s about making sure we’ve understood our customers’ top problems, and figuring out how to deliver a solution to those problems in a way that early customers are willing to “pay” for. (“Pay” in quotes as it depends on your business model.)
If we can’t viably solve early customers’ primary problems, everything else is moot. That is why an MVP is about validated learning.
3. . A few years ago, I had to build an online form builder app that would allow customers to create online payment forms without the need to write any HTML or worry about connecting to a payment gateway. Before having our developers write a single line of code to build the product, we first offered customers the capability as a service: we would get their specs, and then manually build and deliver each online payment form one-by-one, customer-by-customer. Customers would pay us for this service.
This “concierge” type service was our MVP version of our product vision. Of course, it wasn’t scalable. But we learned a heck of a lot: most common types of payment forms they wanted, what was most important to them in a form, frequency of wanting to make changes, reporting needs, and how they perceived the value of the service.
We parlayed these learnings into developing the software app itself — which, by the way, we delivered as an MVP to early customers to whom we had pre-sold the software product. (Yes, we delivered two different types of MVPs!)
Whether you take a “concierge” approach or your MVP is actual code, it most definitely does NOT mean it’s a half-baked or buggy product. (Remember viable from above?)
It DOES mean critically thinking through the absolute necessary features your product will need day 1 to solve your early customers’ top problems, focusing on delivering those first, and putting everything else on the backlog for the time being. It also means being very deliberate about finding those “earlyvangelists” that Steve Blank always talks about.
Ultimately, the key here is “maximum amount of validated learning”. This means being systematic about identifying your riskiest assumptions, formulating testable falsifiable hypotheses around these, and using an MVP — a minimum viable product version of your product vision — to prove or disprove your hypotheses.
Now, validated learning can certainly be accomplished via a landing page, mockup, wireframes, etc. And it may make sense to do these things. Super. But don’t call them MVPs, because while they may deliver value to you and your product idea, they’re not delivering actual value to the customer.
At the same time, the traditional product management exercise of identifying all the features of a product, force ranking them, and then drawing a line through the list to identify the smallest collection to be delivered by a given timeframe is not an MVP. Why? Because this approach is not predicated on maximizing validated learning. If you’re going to pursue this approach, go ahead and call it Release 1.0, Version 1.0, “Beta”, whatever. But don’t call it an MVP.
An MVP is about not just the solution we’re delivering, but also the approach. The key is maximizing validated learning.
I’ve created a handy primer on what is a minimum viable product. Download it below. I hope it helps you to become a pro at defining an MVP for your next great product idea!