4 ms·
This still qualifies as an MVP and is where the confusion arises in my opinion. The minimally viable solution will differ depending on the product and market.
by tcldr 6y ago
This still qualifies as an MVP and is where the confusion arises in my opinion.
The minimally viable solution will differ depending on the product and market.
If you're entering an entirely green market that is just dying for a solution, a ramshackle MVP held together by cardboard and string might be appropriate.
If you're entering a crowded market, you'll be competing on product or price and what's minimally viable will be somewhat different.
We only tend to hear about the former as that's generally where the biggest opportunities exist, so it's more exciting and makes better reading material. However, if you've 'outsourced' your product market fit to the competition and your aim isn't to be first, but the best, your MVP will necessarily be of higher quality.
- nwienert 6y agoAt that point it’s so outside of what everyone uses MVP for, it’s likely best to just call it something else. Almost everyone who uses MVP uses it in context of lean, and it’s useful to do so. Building a really refined product that outclasses on features or experience just isn’t the common usage of MVP. It requires dramatically different framing, strategy. Sloppy code and quick iteration don’t make sense. In reality “viable” does all the work, it’s definition literally means whatever works best, so it’s almost just a poor term to use in the first place as it basically can stretch to mean anything.