Making sense of MVP (Minimum Viable Product)

[@rcaminos]

I've had this picture by my desk for years and I just as this video points out a lot of people don't get it. It's about getting from point A to point B. But what this video taught me was something I never noticed... The fact that the car in the bottom row is a convertible and that it's a convert able because the user enjoyed the experience of being out in the open after riding bikes and skateboards. The user would have been satisfied with a car but never was over joyed with it and not realizing they hated being stuck in a metal box. By getting the user a skateboard it brought them on the journey with the dev team to build what he/she really wanted. Thank you for this amazing video and narration!

[@test-xe4cl]

Thank you for your amazing comment, you taught me something I never noticed even in this video.

[@Name260812]

But when it comes to day to day product building, to decide on a skateboard as the MVP is not an regular occurrence. Instead someone can start the MVP with altogether different feature leading the customer into a direction he regrets. Both sides are possible. With all agile process, the downside is never explained. If explained it is usually trivialised,

[@EGE3101]

@@Name260812 That's why we have User stories, as basis to qualify what the Customer really desires.

[@tannerjagger1445]

I know Im asking randomly but does any of you know of a way to get back into an Instagram account?? I was dumb forgot my login password. I would love any assistance you can give me.

[@tannerjagger1445]

@Sergio Dexter i really appreciate your reply. I found the site through google and I'm trying it out now. Seems to take quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

[@pierreroodman5422]

Almost 5 years later and here I am listening to a fellow South African talking about MVP. Lekker explanation bru.

[@dancebreak29]

This video makes me launch my service in a week instead of 2 months, I was wrong about the concept of MVP. Thanks for the video.

[@deepakdominic4151]

exactly, it helps to start understanding much in depth:)

[@nourhanelsharawy300]

In many lean start up business, entrepreneurs use Minimum viable products or an M.V.P were they put increments of the final product on the market. The purpose of the MVP is to run experiments and get feedback from the customers on possible design solutions. The first step to developing an MVP is to test if there is a common problem between what customer thinks is a problem and what the entrepreneur thinks is a problem. If the problem is common, the entrepreneur can then look at the solutions. The entrepreneur then builds the first increment or the most minimal version of the final product. And that MVP helps the customer understand and visualize what the entrepreneur is designing. The customer should be able to decide if the product is worth investing his/her money into. If the customer decides that the MVP is not worth investing money into, the entrepreneur saved time and money on a product that was not going to sell. The MVP does not have to heavily reflect the finished product because the purpose of the MVP it too maximum learning through trial and error. The MVP however should consist of the same manual steps people would go through with the entrepreneur’s final product. If customers confirm they would spend money on the MVP, the entrepreneur can then go in development and enhancement of final product.

[@dnizil32]

Thank you sir!

[@minsupark9246]

This is the clearest and understandable MVP video I've ever watched~! Thx for the great work!

[@artman40]

Problem can be found in app stores and video game industry who use minimum viable product not to get feedback, but to make sure that customers are just happy enough to get the product but not happy enough for them to leave satisfied (thus wanting more).

[@livesimple-ub9qd]

Think big but deliver in small variables Main goal of start is to learn

[@two-zero]

Thank yoyu for sharing this short yet informative presentation

[@mehdi359]

I simplified all my "complex" prototype. Great Video, Thanks !

[@archivisor]

Learning will cost more for a customer and instead of a car, he will get a bike for the same money. You need to be sure, that customer can afford it and ready for another approach. Then you can find out that not all customers need to be learned, cause some of them evolved since the times Agile came from.

[@cccc7006]

"earliest testable version" is a great term. it implies that the purpose is feedback then whether to zig or zag from there.

[@j0rge-yo]

Customer: i want a car! Me: what´s the problem you want to solve?

[@muhammedyasinkalender6576]

Hahaha :D the designer's mindset

[@scrum532]

The customer should never be "ordering a car." They should be presenting you with a problem statement and together you should create the solution. Otherwise you might not even be addressing the issue.

[@JasonMelrose]

Agree.. That is the part of the story that makes it harder to understand the concepts. I get the idea but in reality of the car example, you actually would have spent more money on the route taken. Might have been more what the consumer wanted but the cost would have been more.. The video makes great points as the customer should be providing I need the ability to do X and Y.. What mechanism is the teams..

[@mahinourmokhtar2820]

exactly, it should be an unconscious need of customers and not an explicit request, otherwise we're missing the point

[@rcaminos]

Oh if only this would happen. I have yet to work at any organization where they don't propose a solution before understanding the problem. You're absolutely right that it should start with a problem statement and if it doesn't then we work with the customer to define one.

[@ThomasAllenKNZ]

It would be great, but it isn't usual, because solutioning appears to be a natural way to think. Most people seem to solution as a way to express their problem. It can often be easier for an analyst (used to formulating problem statements) to infer the underlying problem from conversations with the customer than for the customer to directly articulate their problem.

[@CRSInfoSolutions]

Interesting and explained very well about Minimum viable Product. Thank you.

[@Lilchoco15]

This video is the ABC of MVP... Thank you for putting out the great content 👍

[@parvejislam10]

Very nicely explained.

[@Genetical]

Every game developer: Im going to do what's called a 'pro gamer' move

[@yohanneslucky5538]

Thank you for educating me.

[@kuro_kei]

The picture is the Minimum Viable Product for explaining the concept of Minimum Viable Product.

[@Skylightatdusk]

Brilliant video. Thanks for uploading!

[@tuddak]

CD PR delivered us a wheel. You know what I mean 😄

[@mdamara9266]

Excellent video. Thanks!

[@balakumarvelu]

Very nicely explained, awesome video to learn the core idea behind MVP.

[@kirubielshimeles]

woow I am really blown away

[@samiullahrahmathullah2596]

The example is seen in many places. MVP is incremental development. The second picture showing skating, cycle etc are not incremental, as they are very different things. So it’s easy to justify as a metaphor but in reality it’s bit difficult to find exact MVP features though it is not impossible

[@churchofmarcus]

Great explaining

[@RealityWithJatin]

It's very powerful image

[@lilatacesongs]

amazing video, very helpful

[@TheMISBlog]

Very Useful,Thanks

[@anushreeyabharali9292]

Good explanation

[@chibsoft]

Awesome video! Thanks for it. :)

[@cesaraugustopessoa8927]

Congrats about your video! It's awesome. Eu really like it and appreciate the form of your explanation. Thanks for share it.

[@dramaqueen8083]

Simply awesome

[@test-xe4cl]

Thank you for the various and meticulous thoughts, but still, on the other hand, I've always been wondering about the cons of MVP.

[@nohmekop]

Cons include severe wasted efforts. Unless your product is being developed in stages slowly in which you provide to the "customer" each working step, you wasted time building that figurative skateboard, scooter, bike, and then finally that car.

[@test-xe4cl]

@@nohmekop each working step!..yes MVP is not so trivial as it sounds. Quality matters even for MVP.

[@michaelruger2517]

To put it straight it's transparent (development) costs. Agile development of a final (not MVP) product is much more expensive. However it's imho outweighted by much mor ecustomer satisfaction leading to much less support and change costs. The cost to make the customer in the upper example as happy as in the lower one is even higher. Not to forget thet the MVP may already deliver value to the client i.e. you may get at least a little paied for it. whilst in the other scenario no income during development steps shall be anticipated.

[@vaibhavdangofficial]

This video is gold 😍

[@TheCryptoExperimentWasTaken]

AgeOfGods is a perfect example of this. A crypto GameFi project implementing this philosophy in its development process.

[@neilbrown8631]

So many things wrong this - I hardly know where to start. I don't know what the top progression is supposed to represent - but noone designs this way. We have a conversation about the requirements first. We agree on paper what the client might be looking for - before committing expensive resources developing it. We do not manage customer expectations so that clients expect to be excited about a half built car. As for the bottom continuum. I get the potential advantages. Especially when it comes to SW and how hard it is to tie down clients on requirements who don't really know what they want. I might even say - it is a horse for courses decision which way you go.But let no one be under any illusion here. Iterative design is incredibly inefficient and the justification for it is a lazy one. How hard was it to sit down with the client and find out day one that what they wanted was a convertible? Not hard at all. Each of the steps is a pretty much a do over. Like an ant crawling up a wall and falling off at increasing heights - and starting from the floor once again. Very few of the iterations are 'go live' usable with actual customers. So what exactly do the iterations achieve other than to confirm 'this does not meet your requirement'? I'll absolutely accept that waterfall can go badly wrong too. It does. But let's not pretend that iterative design addresses any of waterfall's fundamental issues. It doesn't - It introduces a host of further challenges and only succeeds in a very small number of niche scenarios. Get your requirements right to start with - and then execute. And don't expect your client to find any of the component parts useful, in isolation of the finished product.

[@riccardofrattali1607]

Okay lets say our customers are satisfied by bicycle stage, and we stoped there and start to produce more. But what if there is someone who is smart understand the market and build motorcycle and dominate our market? Initially it was my idea, but someone used me as a ladder and get to the roof. Isn't it typical failure b/s of applying MVP?

[@JOONHODAVID]

The thing is you must keep it as secret as possible and in a small test group, keep it lean and if someone stole your idea, well now you know where NOT to look for customers

[@natalieheffner8640]

That is why it is important to regularly assess your competitive market and move with the market. If your customers want more and you are not quick enough to the mark, then competitors will jump in. It is key to meet customers wants but also stay innovative, others customers will jump your company and purchase the more sophisticated product.

[@SachinAgrawal_EARIT]

It can be

[@test-xe4cl]

Such a meaningful question.

[@TheRoxas13th]

nice video! thanks for the insight mate!

[@muhammedyasinkalender6576]

Companies try to sell to most people, not to create the best product. That's why they need feedbacks and feedbacks and feedbacks... they just want money, they don't want to be in a specific line or even industry. I think it's not the right mindset, but I act like it is the right mindset so I can get a job as a designer 😄

[@DeviantDeveloper]

Step 4 wouldn't be a car, the client wanted a car, they'd get something with 18 wheels 200 headlights that only goes backwards.

[@sanketbhange2031]

Greate Video sir.

[@SamiEltamawy]

Great explanation .. thanks

[@Fla2038]

Great video!!

[@computersagain]

This is great!

[@iznasen]

@4:31 Whaaat!!!!! I pay you to build the car and not to learn how to build it XD

[@PaulJamesOnGoogle]

Hi CRM Team. I'm not sure you should be using the word "Bastardise" in here, given what it means, it's a bit "rapey"...

[@largemouthbassman5628]

Wait so they want a car but you make a skateboard than a bike? How about build the car slowly like the frame, color, design, tires…..

[@great567]

Your "vision"

[@luisbolanos954]

wow, thank you

[@baaelSiljan]

Yeah, in this MVP example you need to design wheels, chassis and so on, in each iteration. And after this movie I can imagine a lot of PM's forcing devs to create low value product with "we fix it later (never), it is not important now".

[@scrum532]

Same mistakes PMs always seem to make. Fixed, and unreasonable, scope and time OR fix-it-later MVP. Either way, it is a lack of focus on value and quality.

[@TungNguyen-xc2xg]

thanks

[@JakobRobert00]

So if I have understood it correctly, e.g. it is better to first create a UI without any functionality so the user already has something to evaluate rather than to implement the backend first with nothing more than some console logs of the calculated data as output, because the user will not be able to evaluate this in any way and not understand its benefit. And if you start to implement the backend, you would first only make the basic functionalities working and do not care about security, performance, etc. It is better to have all the basic functionalities working somehow, than only have one functionality working perfectly. Is that right?

[@scrum532]

Those approaches are commonplace misconceptions. Each relatively brief iteration creates a working product. It will, by design, not be full featured; those features can be added in future iterations. Designing front-end mockups for consumer feedback may be a tool in the process to improve the product but they are not THE product at the end of an iteration.

[@Visiomax]

Great!

[@davidmitchell6268]

Another relevant article axisbits.com/blog/Post-Launch-MVP-Activities-What-You-Must-do-Within-Next-12-Weeks

[@smartup2]

🔥Nice video! I have also done a video on MVP, happy to get your feedback! 🙏

[@alexandergrossmann9605]

crowdfunding uses this, huh:)?

[@somebodythere4371]

me looking for the hypixel ranks found this not interesting thing

[@locx980]

Hi

[@COSMOPOLITANWORLD]

Hi, i have a question, MVP is part of Scrum?

[@scrum532]

No. Please read the official Scrum framework document, The Scrum Guide at ScrumGuides.org

[@giorgiosaopaulo3183]

Now I understand why people has been misleading about MVPs! Who the heck ordered a car and want be happy with a skateboard?! It’s wrong! Wrong! The illustration is misleading you! A to B was not the request! If the customer wants just something to run around on the campus why are you going to spend money to make a car?!! It’s all wrong!! Spend time with your customers! Try to solve their problems!

[@oldlogin3383]

Nobody delivers a wheel.

[@cailineireann1359]

This is not a MVP. This is delivering a simple product to a customer who asked for a car and expecting feedback that will result in a car. A MVP is an experiment to test a hypothesis such as A customer wants to travel from point A to point B faster than walking. A team goes off and creates something and brings it to the customer...it can be as simple as a drawing that demonstrates the ability to get somewhere faster. You're testing your hypothesis to get feedback - do they like it. What do they like/dislke about the features..what else do they see as a way to meet their need to get somewhere faster. It is intended to be a throw away, not create a release plan. If the customer is keen you build the skateboard, then get more feedback and voila your hypothesis has been proven successful and you are working with the client to build a skateboard, that one day may end up being a car.

[@thecarpentershow8507]

i think this is a poor example unless the customer gets paid for being a beta tester.

[@lukas.prochazka]

This does not work. Skateboard and skooter has nothin in common with a car. If you are delivering a car, creating skateboard or skooter wastes your time as nothing is really reusable on a car development. This is a bullshit pushed by project manager who do not understand how "their" product works. We have exactly this issue with our banking software where our managers wanted to have a MVP asap so we created "different" application with similar UI (to confuse the user). However, almost nothing behind the UI could be reused and we had to start over (more preciselly we were doing it in parallel). This is such a resource waste. You can make even half of car driveable (wheels with single seat and an engine can be driveable). Perhaps if you stoped with the chopper, it might have worked to some extent (as at least a bike is somewhat similar to a chopper - but still requiring a lot of redos).... But making a car out of chopper? No way you can do that.

[@devnull690]

fixed it for you ibb.co/cQbL2U

[@eskojohansson3354]

Donpt givap

[@wernerkomorek5237]

Sorry, doesn't make any sense to me. It's a nice explanation for "non-functional' prototype, since no part of the "MVP" can be used in the next iteration / increment. Each increment starts again from scratch (have you ever see any part from a skateboard in a car? Yes, but in the trunk only). A MVP is a early version of the product, with only essential features implemented. It should never be something completely different. In Crisp's blog you can see only 100% positive feedback, but that's easy. All other were not published!

[@krishnaroyals3806]

Awful

[@beetlejuss]

This example is so confusing, if the client wants a vehicle why are you delivering less than that? make a cheap car and learn how to make a Rolls-Royce, if the company doesn't know what client want the skateboard is a nice try, but just ask the customer. But if the client doesn't know what he wants nor the company, they are just guessing and wasting a lot of resources building 5 different products that the only thing they have in common is they roll.

[@test-xe4cl]

I think that is also true.

[@jamesholder8559]

The customer wants to move forward. The first product moves them forwards a little then it looks better and moved them forward a little faster

[@thomson765]

The customer has a problem. He wants to move quicker, a skateboard solves that problem and user testing it shows problems with that solution, which gives a clearer picture if the next iteration

[@DanylNovhorodov]

Please, don't adapt this to software development in any way - it doomed to fail. Do incremental builds (from not like this image) and iterative designs. And yeah, BMW, Mercedes or Toyota always start with delivering skateboards when designing cars. I bet you all have seen these skateboards on the street, right?

[@scrum532]

🤔 Car manufactures have a product that fills a common, known problem/need. They provide one possible solution, other forms of transportation do exist. The manufactures often use the MVP iterative pattern when attempting improve components or introduce new vehicles. Just because you don't see them on the street doesn't mean it is not happening and isn't valuable. Incremental software builds are even more flexible than the physical example provided in the video. There have been many times when clients say they want X with a long list of specifications. Through using iterative and incremental builds a simpler solution was provided sooner and at less cost.

[@markemerson98]

why waste time demoing a product the customer didnt ask for ? makes no sense and risky

[@scrum532]

Why build a product that the doesn't solve the problem because the customer asked for something they didn't need? Why then rebuild another because the customer realizes it's not what they needed? Makes no sense and is risky. Yet this is what happens constantly. Minimize the risk by working to solve the underlying problem. Often the solution is simpler than both parties realize. Both save time and money. The customer can then bring a new problem to be solved and the mutually beneficial relationship continues.

[@roddypine6077]

always disagree with this example - even in video still is wrong.