Pick the most important part of an idea and make this brillant, would be the better choice for me.
reduce quality never paid off .
Petra Schwarzenbauer

For me, brilliancy takes too long. Take our website as an example, it’s not brilliant but it does the job. We can ship it and go from there, the foundation is solid and is a good base for the future process. If we did it brilliant we wouldn’t have done it in a week, it would‘ve taken a month or even longer.

It follows the Pareto principle, 80% of the outcome is being made in 20% of the time. For me it’s not always necessary to go the extra mile and make it brilliant.

You have to choose wisely on how much quality is needed. You can build a very very solid house (product) with thick walls (brilliant features) but at a low speed. Pareto says you can reduce the thickness of the wall to a critical point (MVP of the feature), where it does it’s job brilliantly and the speed is optimal. The wall (feature) itself isn’t brilliant but the house is exactly what you need in order to live in it (ship the product).

Now you have something to build on. A basis for an argument. Something that can be improved over time and proof or not proof your initial hypothesis.