This publication is broken up into two sections:
TL;DR - For those wanting a quick take
Article - Main body of work containing fully detailed article and explanations that you might want to consume over several readings
TL;DR
The term "Minimum Viable Product" (MVP) has become too ambiguous, with multiple conflicting definitions ranging from a rough first version to a fully functional product. Originally defined by Frank Robinson in 2001 as maximizing return on risk, and popularized by Eric Ries in 2011 as a product that early adopters will pay for, the MVP concept has lost its clarity.
Instead of using the term, I recommend the following:
Adopting Don Reinertsen's principles of product development as a way of thinking about product development through a holistic economic framework.
Creating a product development process tailored to your specific industry and market.
If you must use "MVP", clearly define what you mean and ensure your team is aligned on the approach.
The key is to focus on a structured method of product development that provides value, learns from customer insights, and adapts accordingly.
Article
We should drop the phrase Minimum Viable Products (MVP). The phrase has outlived its usefulness.
I say this given the confusion that has come about because of the multiple definitions and understandings that exist in the ‘product world’ around what an MVP means.
For some an MVP is a first version of product that you would be embarrassed to release, for others an MVP is a set of bets on a product or feature ideas and for others an MVP is a fully functional product that delivers on the various layers (i.e., user value, great user experience, something that is technically feasible and financially viable) of what makes a great product.
So when someone says we should build an MVP what definition are they referring to?
One of the first documented uses of the term was by Frank Robinson in 2001 where he defined an MVP with the following words “Minimum Viable Product is that unique product that maximises return on risk for both the vendor and the customer”. This definition implies providing a ‘complete’ functioning production grade product that you can sell for money. The great thing about his framing is that it does not preclude you from incorporating market and customer insights and applying them in your next product increment (i.e. release or launch). The only challenge is he did not specify an explicit approach as to how you would tactically go about defining what makes up a MVP.
The second and most popular definition of MVP comes Eric Ries. Eric popularized the MVP term in his 2011 book “Lean Startup” where he defined a MVP as “That product which has just those features and no more that allows you to ship a product that early adopters see and . . . pay you money for, and start to give you feedback on.”.
The main point Eric emphasised that Steve Blank pushed in his work Four Steps to the Epiphany is the notion of Validated Learning. This is where the famous Learn – Build -Measure loop was applied. From my perspective, this loop helped product developers to think through the following: “what do we need to learn so that we can build a validated solution where we can use metrics to gain insights on how we can improve what we are offering to clients?”
So where do we go from here?
My personal preference is to apply the key principles proposed by Don Reinertsen captured in seminal work called the ‘The Principles of Product Development Flow: Second Generation Lean Product Development’. The beauty of this approach is you can build a product development process that is a good fit for your industry, market and customer segments by adhering to first principles anchored around an economic framework.
If you still want to use the MVP phrase at least be clear on what definition you are referring to. Also make sure your product development team is aligned on a structured approach as to how you will go about developing an MVP. Some good advice from Michael Seibel on MVPs.