MVP - you are so misunderstood.....

why the memes mislead and simplified illustrations should be chucked in the bin

MVP has become such a cornerstone of our discipline but one that is often the MOST misunderstood!

So many people are still referring to this misused representation of MVP as a way of explaining how to do it - but to me this is simply WRONG - how can I validate the value of a car by giving a customer a skateboard? …..

: CHUCK OUT this illustration as it in NO WAY defines what an MVP packet of work should be about.

WHY??

This old illustration has led to the ‘MVP’ as it was originally devised being misused misunderstood and is likely responsible for many product teams having tricky conversations with their stakeholders.

BECAUSE : It’s only focusing on the V for VIABLE

For example: in this basic A to B use case a skateboard can of course transfer ONE person from A to B but it in no way enables validation of the value of a car…..🤯 …..it’s not considering the other two definitions of what V must ALWAYS also achieve

V = Value
V = Validation

Let me explain.

This misinterpretation of V only representing Viable as illustrated in the diagram - completely deviates away from the methodology : scientific method that was originally intended when MVP as a concept/approach was first introduced by Frank Robinson in 2001 and then popularised/explained in Eric Reis’ book “Lean Start Up”

Eric Reis’s definition: “That version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort”

So chuck this illustration OUT once and for all!!

An MVP is not a product with the least possible functionality needed to launch.

In fact it has nothing to do launching a product at all! I know mind blowing right!!

MVP is the key to using the scientific method for building products. It is a mechanism for ‘validated learning’, to test a hypotheses to discover what will meet customers’ needs to give them value.