Week 16, 2020
MVPs: Maximum Learning, Minimum Effort, and Fit-for-Purpose.
Each week I share three ideas for how to make work better. This week, the topic is innovation and Minimum-Viable Products (MVPs).
Why am I writing about this? Experience has taught me to pause whenever the term “MVP” gets used. Misconceptions abound about what MVPs are, why they are used, and how they are built.
It’s time to set the record straight:
1. Maximum Learning
The term MVP was first coined in the early 2000s and later popularized by the likes of Steve Blank and Eric Ries. The rationale was and remains simple: to maximize learning at minimum effort. MVPs are experiments. They’re used to validate ideas. And despite what you might have heard, they are not product increments.
I repeat, MVPs are not product increments.
2. Minimum Effort
MVPs are often misunderstood to be increments because “minimally viable” is taken to mean “crude” or lacking finesse. But that is not the case. MVPs are not prototypes. They should be feasible, valuable, usable, and delightful. They should be all of those things. Only small and (relatively) easy to build.
And again, they are not product increments.
3. Fit-for-Purpose
Different types of MVPs are used for different purposes. Pitch MVPs are mock landing pages used to assess viability of to-be products or services. Wizard of OZ MVPs are designed to validate feasibility of the same; they’re “facades” that look real deal but actually involve manual behind-the-scenes work.
There are other types as well. But none of them are product increments.
Did I mention that MVPs are not product increments? Because they’re not. They’re experiments. And they help you refine the product or service that you are working on. As Henrik Kniberg’s sketch explains:
If you are like most people, your takeaway from the above will be that MVPs must be useful and valuable, etc. And that’s true — a person that needs to go places will presumably have more use for a skateboard than a single wheel. But there’s another, less obvious, takeaway as well:
While a skateboard can become a kick-bike, a kick-bike cannot become a bicycle. And a motorcycle cannot become a car. Not without some major reconfiguration. And the same goes for MVPs.
MVPs are not increments atop which future iterations are built. They are experiments. And that’s something different entirely.
That’s all for this week.
/Andreas
PS. Hat tip to Jakkris Tangkuampien. His presentation at last year’s AgileTour Bangkok helping me see the light in terms the (un)extendability of MVPs.
