Escaping the MVP Trap: A Smarter Approach to Starting New Software Projects

Many agile software development teams and startups initially strive to develop a Minimum Viable Product (MVP). This compact prototype aims to captivate interest, engage potential users, and, ideally, generate revenue. However, the reality often ends up being much different, as most MVPs resemble fully outfitted spacecraft rather than the humble, bare-bones vessels they were intended to be.

Instead of assuming an MVP should be the first deliverable, consider another more innovative and leaner approach.

The Riskiest Assumption Test (RAT) is not just a test; it's a compass for your project. It could prevent your project from heading in the wrong direction. Let's explore why starting with a RAT is the way to go and why your MVP might need to shed a few pounds.

What is an MVP?

A Minimum Viable Product is a deliverable that contains only the essential features needed to gain user adoption. This might be a new or existing user base. The intent is that by focusing on just the essentials, an MVP can require fewer resources (cost less) and will start a conversation with users to gain helpful feedback on what features should get the most attention. The product can then be iteratively improved to refine and add new features informed by the opinions of active users.  

An MVP can minimize risk by preventing the full build out of a solution that doesn't resonate with the market.

The Trouble with MVPs

While the concept of an MVP is to create the simplest version of a product that can deliver value and gather feedback, in practice, many MVPs resemble fully-featured products.

Some things that can contribute to this problem are:

• The fear of creating something imperfect: Worrying that something too simple or bare bones will reflect poorly on the team or turn off potential users.
• Stakeholder pressure: They may push for more features or better design, believing that a more polished product is necessary to impress users or secure further funding.
• Desire to satisfy all users: Trying to cater to an audience that is too broad.
• Over-engineering: Including features, optimizations, or architectural decisions not necessary for an MVP but included for future scalability or performance.

The most significant risk of an MVP approach is that you may be iteratively improving a flawed foundation. This might result in building features few users want or even getting feedback on the wrong assumptions. 

What is a Riskiest Assumption Test?

A RAT focuses on proving the assumption that poses the highest risk to the project's success. It doesn't have to (and usually shouldn't) look like the finished product. It should be the most straightforward implementation required to test the assumption, nothing more. It's comparatively inexpensive, and the insights gained can significantly shape the project's future. 

Using a RAT increases the chance that the MVP (or final product) meets the market's needs and wants. This method fits well within an agile approach to software development as it is most effective when used to learn, iterate, and measure the viability of the assumption.

Avoid Building a Fancy Product Nobody Wants

One of the original intents of developing an MVP is to test a hypothesis. In practice, this is rarely the result. Instead, the team focuses on building a product.

Imagine spending months perfecting the ultimate craft beer, only to find out your target market prefers cider. That's the danger of skipping a "Riskiest Assumption Test" (RAT). By jumping straight to an MVP, you could refine something no one in your market wants.

The RAT method gives you the power to determine whether people want a beer before investing in all that brewing equipment. If your assumption is wrong, you can switch gears and start producing cider instead, all without committing to brewing a batch of beer that won't sell. This method keeps you in control and ensures you're always moving in the right direction.

The Limitations of a Riskiest Assessment Test

The RAT approach assumes the project's objective is to create something new. We frequently build products that replace existing solutions as a software development agency. When we replace something people are already using, we typically don't have the luxury of reimagining too much functionality. Change is hard. Getting adoption from the existing user base will require a certain amount of familiarity with the overall feel of the product. For this reason, building an MVP might make more sense when the objective is moving users from the old system to the new one before adding significant change.

Leveraging the RAT is best when introducing something new to the market, but we understand that this isn't always the objective. Sometimes, the goal is replicating an existing feature set in a modern, maintainable implementation that discards the technology debt accumulated by the existing (in-use) solution.

Start with a RAT and Keep Your MVP Slim

If you want to keep your software project from spiraling into an overbuilt, complicated mess, start with a "Riskiest Assumption Test." It's faster, cheaper, and gets right to the point. Once you've tackled the scariest unknowns, then (and only then) move on to building your MVP—but keep it slim. Remember, the MVP isn't your final product; it's just a quick taste to see if people are interested. 

Contact us if you want to explore how to approach the market with a new software product. We would love to partner with you.

Contact Us