MVP - Most Valuable Product
The acronym “MVP” is the hottest term to hit the tech scene since “social networking” or perhaps, “content driven commerce.” It’s so hot, in fact, that no one seems to know what it means anymore. To some people, it’s the literal software definition, “Minimum Viable Product.” Others take a much wider approach and consider “MVP” to refer to their first release regardless of the scope, size and duration it takes to build. Let’s call this, “Most Valuable Product.”
Last week, I was talking to someone about a social network they were planning on releasing in Q1 of 2016. While describing his MVP he said, “Minimally, we need to compete with Facebook.” That would be like writing a sci-fi movie script and saying, “Minimally, it has to compete with Star Wars…Minimally,” while pitching the concept around to studios.
First off, I have no problem trying to take on Tinder, Facebook, Twitter or even Google. I admire the aspiration or even the cockiness. No one gets anywhere without being a little brash. But for my sanity, let’s call it what it is. Chances are, if you are looking to compete with a Fortune 500 company out of the gate, there is nothing minimal about your product. These companies have spent years iterating to build the product they have today. To make it easier, I’ve made a simple high level checklist. If the answer is yes to any of these, you are NOT building a Minimum Viable Product :
Budget is over 200K (that does not include hardware) Timeline is over 5 months Building on 2+ platforms at once Feature set is comparable to a Fortune 500 A large company trying to piggyback on startup ideology
That last one is tricky, however. As a former senior engineer and current business developer, I see the process of trend formation in every prospective client meeting. I’ll hear the term “MVP” being used, alongside a release to 10 million users. Now, can a large company release a minimum viable product? Of course they can. Should they? I’m not sure. In baseball, it’s like saying the Red Sox (large market) and the Rays (small market) should have the same approach to choosing their players. The Red Sox are much more flexible to take on larger risk/payroll, but their fanbase is much more critical on a year to year basis. Their priorities are different. For a company that is releasing something into their ecosystem, there is more at stake to really nail it off the bat. To give you a comparison, I’ve often been asked if I recommend user-testing in an MVP type process. To get an better understanding regarding a product’s viability, generally I’ll ask, “Isn’t that what your MVP is for?” Now, I might give a different answer to a company like Mercedes, who have a dedicated user base and an existing expectation for their digital products. All this being said, it’s important to call out that these products can also suffer from a lack of creativity because of various business needs and stakeholder opinions that need to be upheld.
Often times, entrepreneurs do not have the same kind of financial flexibility that a Fortune 100 company has. Many product decisions need to be based on money, timing and getting something out there as quickly as possible. If building products were like a game of poker, I would refer to a term called “pot odds” as a good reference for what you should be building in your MVP. (“Pot odds are the ratio of the current size of the pot to the cost of a contemplated call”). In many ways, this is used to come up with an estimated value of your current situation in the hand. I think this translates pretty nicely. Understand your market and your bank account and then make an appropriate bet based on the probability of all three of those variables. The lesson to be learned is to never put in more than you have to.
Side Note : Product design has also become a confusing term in of itself. I’ve noticed that most of my peers have switched their LinkedIn profiles from “Interaction Designer” to “Product Designer” without really understanding the difference. It’s become another buzzword that has morphed and transformed away from its original definition, along with MVP.
This is what HappyFunCorp typically sells: Product Design. Building, running, marketing, distributing and supporting digital products is a marathon, not a sprint. Whether you decide to build a minimum viable product or a most valuable product, it is important to understand what you are getting. Obviously, we prefer one approach over the other, but it’s not an exact science…Like I said before, let’s call it what it is.
Please read more blog posts here:
https://codex.happyfuncorp.com/