3 ms·

I have never had the experience of developing a product from MVP to mass market. Is ‘Throw Away then Strategize/Plan’ utilized with any regularity? Would it fol

I have never had the experience of developing a product from MVP to mass market. Is ‘Throw Away then Strategize/Plan’ utilized with any regularity? Would it follow that the initial team who scraps together the MVP would be different than the Strategize/Plan team that might be hired specifically because they have the experience/background for building large scale systems (assuming expanded funding comes from market validation via the MVP)?

perrygeo 3y ago
> Is ‘Throw Away then Strategize/Plan’ utilized with any regularity Yes. But I'd frame it a different way. The initial implementation is the source of empirical data that you need to formulate a viable plan. You're not building something to "throw it away". You're building something so that all subsequent decisions can be made on a solid foundation. To be concrete, I've seen teams faced with a technical decision who a) argue about it in meetings for weeks, bringing only opinions and personal experiences to the table vs. b) set up a proof of concept for all options and run benchmarks which can be used to make informed decisions. (a) takes longer and produces an inferior product - I've never seen an exception.
- toss1 3y ago
  >> argue about it in meetings for weeks, bringing only opinions YUP: One test is worth a thousand opinions. (and yes, the entire point of the throw-away version is to test every aspect of the MVP++. And sure, you may keep some chunks of it, but that is sort of based on luck. A big part of the attitude on the initial version is that no one needs to think about technical debt here - it's all a big experiment, done to generate information and data to build a solid foundation.)