Fantastic analysis, Bandan. I particularly liked the conclusion that the common knowledge to "release as soon as possible" might not always be the right approach.
At the same time, it's worth considering Dan Olsen's advice from The Lean Product Playbook. You shouldn't build an MVP (both prototype and the first version of the product) without having a great UX for your selected feature set from the start.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights on product development, Bandan, and your thoughts here, Paweł. I couldn't agree more with your observation that the "release as soon as possible" approach may not always be the best strategy for a successful product launch.
As for Dan Olsen's advice, it's spot on. It's essential to prioritise creating what we designers call a "Minimum Viable Experience (MVE)" for users rather than simply focusing on an MVP. Doing so ensures that users have a more satisfactory experience with the product and are more likely to engage with it, leading to greater adoption and success.
It's not just about creating a product that works - it's about creating an experience people love. By putting the user at the centre of the product development process and prioritising their needs and desires, we'll be well on our way to creating a winning product. Keep up the great work!
Great thoughts Pawel and Leo. This case study also reminds me of my Chief Product Officer at Gojek who described MLP to me as: solves one problem nicely and is marketable. Great to know about Minimum Viable experience (MVE) Leo! MVE seems to be a subset of a MLP goal.
When you say "At a highly scaled company, the first iteration of the product should be a minimum lovable product and not a MVP" Why should this be different for a startup? Even they are competing against existing products that have raised the bar w.r.t customer experiences. When does the MVP truly help in that case?
At startups, MVPs are two way doors: you test, you fail but not many customers are impacted and you can always find a quick way to pivot. At highly scaled companies , users already expect a minimum quality of product and if you publish a subpar it impacts millions of users.
MVP helps test the riskiest assumptions for startups. Example ride sharing would test for : Would riders like to get into a car with a driver who is a stranger ?
In that case, can't bigger orgs launch MVPs to a small base as beta which they often do before doing a bigger rollout? Still thinking of how MVPs can be useful for both startups and bigger orgs. I believe MLPs are needed when you are reaching out to a bigger base i.e. you have maybe validated your riskiest assumption? However , whether you are a startup or a bigger org wouldn't really matter in that case I think
Generally orgs think about it as a sequence , MVP first and then MLP. But organisations with huge amount of data and customers insights can move to MLP directly to meet high expectations of its customer base. It’s like Facebook launching reels should be MLP directly. Reels have been around for so long that users expect minimum level of quality.
But in product there’s no black or white, so I would say yes MVP can still be utilised in bigger companies but it might be for a super new disruptive technology that users do not expect a mind blowing UI and UX for yet.
Fantastic analysis, Bandan. I particularly liked the conclusion that the common knowledge to "release as soon as possible" might not always be the right approach.
At the same time, it's worth considering Dan Olsen's advice from The Lean Product Playbook. You shouldn't build an MVP (both prototype and the first version of the product) without having a great UX for your selected feature set from the start.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and insights on product development, Bandan, and your thoughts here, Paweł. I couldn't agree more with your observation that the "release as soon as possible" approach may not always be the best strategy for a successful product launch.
As for Dan Olsen's advice, it's spot on. It's essential to prioritise creating what we designers call a "Minimum Viable Experience (MVE)" for users rather than simply focusing on an MVP. Doing so ensures that users have a more satisfactory experience with the product and are more likely to engage with it, leading to greater adoption and success.
It's not just about creating a product that works - it's about creating an experience people love. By putting the user at the centre of the product development process and prioritising their needs and desires, we'll be well on our way to creating a winning product. Keep up the great work!
Great thoughts Pawel and Leo. This case study also reminds me of my Chief Product Officer at Gojek who described MLP to me as: solves one problem nicely and is marketable. Great to know about Minimum Viable experience (MVE) Leo! MVE seems to be a subset of a MLP goal.
When you say "At a highly scaled company, the first iteration of the product should be a minimum lovable product and not a MVP" Why should this be different for a startup? Even they are competing against existing products that have raised the bar w.r.t customer experiences. When does the MVP truly help in that case?
Loved the question !
At startups, MVPs are two way doors: you test, you fail but not many customers are impacted and you can always find a quick way to pivot. At highly scaled companies , users already expect a minimum quality of product and if you publish a subpar it impacts millions of users.
MVP helps test the riskiest assumptions for startups. Example ride sharing would test for : Would riders like to get into a car with a driver who is a stranger ?
In that case, can't bigger orgs launch MVPs to a small base as beta which they often do before doing a bigger rollout? Still thinking of how MVPs can be useful for both startups and bigger orgs. I believe MLPs are needed when you are reaching out to a bigger base i.e. you have maybe validated your riskiest assumption? However , whether you are a startup or a bigger org wouldn't really matter in that case I think
Generally orgs think about it as a sequence , MVP first and then MLP. But organisations with huge amount of data and customers insights can move to MLP directly to meet high expectations of its customer base. It’s like Facebook launching reels should be MLP directly. Reels have been around for so long that users expect minimum level of quality.
But in product there’s no black or white, so I would say yes MVP can still be utilised in bigger companies but it might be for a super new disruptive technology that users do not expect a mind blowing UI and UX for yet.
Got it, thanks for responding on this thread Bandan!
No worries Jayesh. Look forward to interacting on next case studies :)
Great post! Critical to understand the distribution of MVPs in large-scale organisations.
Thanks Nilay. Look forward to your comments and feedback on productify.