I agree that half-assery is a failure mode of the adaptive approach. I don't think it's an inherent problem with the approach, though, just a common mistake peo

I agree that half-assery is a failure mode of the adaptive approach. I don't think it's an inherent problem with the approach, though, just a common mistake people make. You're supposed to split your product into pieces with compelling value. But often people misinterpret ideas such as "minimum viable product" as splitting the product into pieces with minimum value. And that's a mistake. (Minimum viable product, of course, not being about products at all, but about product-market fit and testing your ideas as soon as possible using low-fidelity experiments.) You can have a coherent user experience and still use an adaptive approach. I think Alphabet's failures have more to do with Alphabet's culture, particularly around rewards and promotions, and perhaps a disdain for non-engineering skills, rather than taking an adaptive approach.