Uxpin guide to_mvps

THE GUIDE TO
MINIMUM VIABLE PRODUCTS
A Master Collection of Frameworks, Expert Opinions, and Examples

INDEX
4 Introduction
8 Minimum Viable Products -Defined by The Experts
9 What’s An MVP?
10 Experts’ Takes on MVPs
18 MVPs are an important means to an end
19 M in MVP: Expert Takes on Product Minimalism
21 Seize your unfair advantage quickly
23 Focus on the assumptions to avoid scope creep
26 Stay true to your product DNA
27 Keep it simple and experimental
29 The V in MVP: Expert Takes on Product Viability
30 Establishing and Sustaining Viability
32 Understanding Product vs. Business Viability
33 Determining Product Viability
34 Determining Business Viability
39 Have a method for the qualitative madness
41 Give your product a life of its own
42 P in MVP: Expert Takes on Product Quality
43 8 Dimensions of Product Quality
44 Play to Emotions — Delight Early Adopters
48 Add Logical Value — Help Them Do Something
51 Leverage Networks — Don’t Rely On Them
52 Quality Varies By MVP Purpose
53 Focus on a complete product instead of complete features
54 Balancing Product UX and Lean Execution
56 Competing Priorities: Experience vs. Execution
60 The Stages of Product Development

62 UX Design vs. Lean Design
64 Stay Lean — With Your Eye On UX
66 Top 15 Ways to Test Minimum Viable Product
67 Testing your MVP
85 Getting out the door
87 Building Minimum Viable Products at Spotify
89 Lean & Agile at Spotify
91 I. Think It
94 II. Build It
97 III. Ship It
98 IV. Tweak it
100 More Product Stages = Less Cost, Less Risk
102 4 Reasons Minimum Viable Products Fail
104 Systematically tackling 3 types of risk
106 How teams fail to address these risks
113 Stay Focused Or Your MVP Will SUX
114 10 Massively Successful Minimum Viable Products
115 1. Dropbox
117 2. Airbnb
118 3. Groupon
119 4. Buffer
121 5. Zappos
123 6. Twitter
124 7. Zynga
125 8. Foursquare
126 9. Spotify
127 10. Pebble
128 Testing the Riskiest Assumptions

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
A quick note from the author
Share this ebook
with friends!

5
Minimum viable products are frequently misunderstood and misused. Because
most business are strapped for resources, it’s a common mistake to focus only on
the “minimum” part to get something out the door quickly.
But an MVP is much more than just a minimum product. It is perfection by sub-
traction, the best bang for your buck, a serious reality check — “Hello, World!”. An
MVP trims all the fat and leaves just the essence of your value to customers with
the resources.
In this book, we’ll share a wide breadth of expert commentary, theories, prac-
tices, and real-life examples of MVP success and failure. To name a few, we’ve
included advice from entrepreneurs like Steve Blank, Eric Ries, Guy Kawasaki,
Ash Maurya, Andrew Chen, Cindy Alvarez, Rand Fishkin, David Aycan, Joel
Gascoigne, Josh Puckett, Brandon Schauer, Chrys Bader, Neil Patel, Nick Swin-
murn, and more. We’ll discuss basic concepts like the different types of MVPs
and how to test hypotheses with MVPs. For more experienced readers, we’ve also
laid out how to apply MVP thinking in a Lean and Agile environment, how to bal-
ance UX with Lean development, and even Spotify’s internal design process. Our
hope is that it will help you better understand how to strike the perfect balance
between resource minimalism, business viability, and product quality in your next
MVP.
When you think about it, testing an MVP is probably the most important step
to success for companies. We’ll look at how highly successful companies like
Twitter, Zynga, Foursquare, Dropbox, Zappos, Groupon, Oculus VR, Airbnb,
Buffer, Pebble among others built the right MVP for the right reasons to help
them refine their business idea and get people buzzing about their products.
We’ve also included our own story and outlined how you can use UXPin to help
prototype your own MVP.

6
We’d love your thoughts on what we’ve written. And feel free to include anyone
else in the discussion by sharing this e-book.
For the love of minimum viable products,
Chris Bank
(co-written by Jerry Cao & Waleed Zuberi)
Chris Bank is the growth lead @UXPin. He also
led growth @Lettuce (acquired by Intuit),@MyFit
(acquired by Naviance), and his own startup @Epost-
marks (USPS strategic partner), and launched @Kag-
gle in the B2B tech vertical. In his downtime, he rock
climbs, motorcycles, designs apps, travels, and reads.
Visit my website and Follow me on Twitter.
Jerry Cao is a content strategist at UXPin where he
gets to put his overly active imagination to paper
every day. In a past life, he developed content strat-
egies for clients at Brafton and worked in traditional
advertising at DDB San Francisco. In his spare time he
enjoys playing electric guitar, watching foreign horror
films, and expanding his knowledge of random facts.
Follow me on Twitter.

7
Waleed Zuberi is passionate about creating better
user experiences through thoughtful design. When
he’s not writing or pushing pixels on the web, he
enjoys biking, playing cricket and binge-watching
TV. Visit his website and follow him on Twitter.

8
CHAPTER TWO
MINIMUMVIABLEPRODUCTS
-DEFINEDBYTHEEXPERTS
How the top product minds in the world think about MVPs
Share this ebook
with friends!

9
Today, lean startups and tech titans alike are increasingly using the minimum
viable product (MVP) as a starting point for building successful software products.
By focusing on an integral set of key features and core functionality for prod-
uct development, firms can efficiently establish a definitive core to form the
basis out of which the rest of the product can evolve. If they can’t get this right,
they risk ending up with a product that SUX — an offering with a “Sh***y User
Experience.”
Source: Lean Heroes
WHAT’S AN MVP?
Startups and tech titans alike use varying measures for defining what goes into
an MVP, and many are still slightly misguided.
A common misconception is that an MVP consists of the minimum set of features
deemed necessary for a working software product, with the goal of bringing it to
market quickly. This misses the mark on several levels, most notably in the over-
emphasis on speedy delivery and time to market, as opposed to focusing on
customer and market acceptance. Indeed, rapid development is of essence, but
only to the extent that learning and research objectives can be obtained quickly.

10
As defined by Wikipedia, “The minimum viable product (MVP) is a strategy used for
fast and quantitative market testing of a product or product feature. The term was
coined by Frank Robinson and popularized by Eric Ries for web applications.” This
definition is narrow — particularly, it’s too quantitative and product-focused —
according to many experts. However, some of the noted purposes of an MVP
below begin to open up a more significant discussion:
• Be able to test a product hypothesis with minimal resources
• Accelerate learning
• Reduce wasted engineering hours
• Get the product to early customers as soon as possible
Let’s look at what the experts have to have to say.
EXPERTS’ TAKES ON MVPS
It’s important for you and your team to form your own opinion about what an
MVP means to you, but hopefully the viewpoints of some notable executives
below help you flesh that out.

11
Sources: Eric, Ash, Nick, Steve, Rand, Cindy and Marcin
Eric Ries, cofounder/CTO of IMVU and MVP proponent, defines an MVP as
a version of a new product that allows for the most learning possible for the least
amount of effort. That is to say, an MVP allows for testing actual usage scenarios
with customers. To this end, expensive market research and subsequent product
development is eschewed; instead, a rapidly-built product with a minimum set of
features is deployed to test assumptions about customer requirements.
You’ve probably already heard this definition enough times to make you scream.
So let’s round this off with other helpful perspectives.

12
Source: Build Measure Learn
Ash Maurya, CEO of P2P sharing site Cloudfire and author of Running
Lean - Helping Entrepreneurs Succeed, recounts his experiences in building an
MVP for his startup. After identifying a target group of users, he then proceeded
to identify the three main issues they experienced with current solutions on the
market. He was then able to build a solution to minimally address those issues,
and drive early adopters to sign up via the product’s landing page. Fortunately for
Maurya, the process was simplified through leveraging key functionality from a
previous product. This allowed him to dramatically cut the time and effort it took
him to validate his assumptions about the potential user base for his product.
Reflecting on his experience, Ash now emphasizes the importance of capturing
customer value with any MVP. It’s critical to get the product right, so make sure
you have a problem worth solving. Using the Lean Canvas framework below, he
highlights the 4 critical steps to nailing the product in your MVP:
• First make sure you have a problem worth solving.
• Then define the smallest possible solution (MVP).
• Build and validate your MVP at small scale (demonstrate UVP).

13
• Then verify it at large scale.
• To understand market and customer risks of an MVP, see his post The 10x
Product Launch.
Source: The 10x Product Launch
Marcin Treder, CEO and Co-Founder of UXPin, went through a very similar
experience although his company’s existing product was a paper prototyping
notepad while the current solution is a web-based wireframing and prototyp-
ing application. “Clearly, the paper products were cheaper to make initially,” he
states, “But we honestly had no idea that our next version of the product would
be technical — we were a few designers just trying to help our peers become
better designers.”

14
“An MVP requires minimum development effort to create maximum value.”
But he quickly realized how fragmented the existing solutions were and how
much people complained about them.According to Treder, “An MVP isn’t the
quickest or the most perfect product. Rather, it is a product with minimum devel-
opment effort that creates maximum value.” He admits that his first product
didn’t provide the maximum value given current alternatives today. But, today,
UXPin is one of the leading wireframing and prototyping applications on the mar-
ket. So he clearly made the transition.
Source: Practical Product Management for New Product Managers
To get the most value out of development efforts, you can use the above matrix
to systematically prioritize features. Of course, not all lean startups will have
the luxury of having a pre-existing product to massage into MVP form. In many
cases, this is barely necessary.
Nick Swinmurn, Zappos co-founder, experienced this first-hand. In an
Share
Quote

15
extreme case of MVP leanness and agility, the e-commerce stalwart’s humble
beginnings started with Swinmurn photographing shoes at a local retailer. He
then posted the photos online and, for each online order, he would return to
the retailer and buy the necessary items. In this sense, the primary objective of
an MVP is to eliminate business uncertainty to the greatest extent possible. He
didn’t have a product and acted as his own customer in the initial stages.
And it’s far more common for companies to sell and market vaporware (products
that don’t yet exist or barely exist) — especially in the startup world.
Cindy Alvarez, UX for Yammer and previously Product at Kissmetrics,
echoes that a common mistake people make is assuming an MVP needs to be
a product. According to her, the goal of an MVP is to maximize learning while
minimizing risk and investment and, therefore, a product should not be the only
means to that end. By thinking so narrowly about MVPs, she has seen many peo-
ple start by thinking about the “final” product and trying to cut features instead of
doing anything scientific. To avoid this pitfall, one of her rules of thumb is follow-
ing the Cupcake Model whereby you think of one complete experience.

16
Source: 7 Ways to Test MVPs
She also provides some practical advice in executing on MVPs within teams.
She claims there are two important problems that must be addressed head-on
internally:
1. Set expectations appropriately — No one wants to build something
crappy and feel that they will never get the chance to make it better. Empha-
size that the purpose of MVPs is to make sure your team isn’t wasting its time
on worthless products and features and that your team can actually improve
the product using validated testing.
2. Set your MVP target customer appropriately — Be careful about building
for a mainstream audience. If you do, they may tell you it sucks and you’ll get
the wrong signals about what you’re building. Instead, find customers with an
identified early pain and show them your early, sloppy MVP that is supposed
to solve their problem.
Steve Blank, a serial-entrepreneur and author / lecturer on MVPs, asserts
that the Customer Development and Lean Startup methodology under-empha-
sizes the importance of selling a vision to visionaries — not everyone — while
delivering a minimum feature set. From his observations, many people easily
comprehend how to build a minimal product with few features (the Minimum

17
Feature Set), but they fail to acknowledge that most people won’t like their MVP
— how many people do you know will brag about a minimal product? Instead,
companies should be building early adoption and evangelism while selling a
vision about how the world will work, and be so much better, with the product
being built a few years out based on a minimal product that you can play around
with today.
1. Has a Problem
2. Is Aware of a having a Problem
3. Has been Actively Looking
for a Solution
4. Has Put Together a Solution
out of Piece Parts
5. Has or can
acquire a Budget
Source: Silicon Africa, 5 Characteristics of Earlyvangelists
Rand Fishkin, co-founder of Moz, seems to be more of a showman than the
rest. From his perspective, first impressions matter — a lot. It is for this reason
that he encourages others to take their MVP one step further toward being an
EVP (an Exceptional, Viable Product). He claims to have seen a lot of MVPs launch
that hardly produce significant value, and strongly believes it’s highly problem-
atic. After all, there’s only so many times you can re-launch a product. In practice,
Rand suggests making your MVPs in-house and dogfooding them internally and
with a few customers. Gather feedback and iterate until the first internal and
external users find that “A Ha” moment, then release it to the wild as an EVP. This

18
may take an extra 30-90+ days to reach this point but, in his opinion, it’s well
worth the wait.
Source: Moz, “7 unlikely recommendations for startups & entrepreneurs”
MVPS ARE AN IMPORTANT MEANS TO AN END
There are many ways to skin a cat, but even more ways to deliver an MVP.
Although each expert has their own twist on what an MVP means to them and
the golden rules they follow to make sure they don’t get caught in the weeds, the
underlying message is the same: MVPs are a means to an end product or product
improvement, not the end product itself. Make sure you don’t lose sight of that.

19
CHAPTER TWO
MINMVP:EXPERTTAKESON
PRODUCTMINIMALISM
How to think about constraints when building your next product
Share this ebook
with friends!

20
Applying minimalism is perhaps the most difficult but important part of the MVP
process. After all, your interpretation determines the strategy behind selecting
the right features and technical resources. Use the right amount of minimal-
ism and you create an elegant gem that is low-cost and high-learning. Go over-
board with trimming your features and you end up with a shoddy prototype that
doesn’t just fail at answering your hypotheses but could embarrass the brand.
Source: Stop Overthinking… Just Stop
So how do you build a stripped-down product that is affordable and appealing?
Start by understanding the difference between these 2 questions:
Question A: How can we build the simplest technically feasible product?
Question B: How can we build the simplest product to resonate with early
adopters?
The first approach prioritizes deliverability and can result in the mistake of using
a set of tires to test the concept of a car. The second approach focuses on the
core value of the product, a principle that is much more helpful towards uncover-
ing the learnings you need.
Read on to hear expert advice on MVPs and how you can use minimalism to
develop a high-quality, focused experiment for your most important users.

21
SEIZE YOUR UNFAIR ADVANTAGE QUICKLY
When designing the UXPin MVP for the US market, we interviewed influencers
to gather feedback on what features and functionality were missing in today’s
UX tools. We bounced around ideas on product strategy and even sketched wire-
frames on napkins. We sought their advice to better understand the early adopter
mindset and prevent ourselves from releasing a “minimum product” that would
fail to convey our vision.
Former Apple chief evangelist, Guy Kawasaki, asserts in his MVP philosophy
that the MVP does not need to be perfect but it does need to be revolutionary.
The goal of minimalism then is to reduce engineering waste by only incorporat-
ing enough features that embody your unfair advantage to capture the interest
of early adopters. These “earlyvangelists” (coined by serial entrepreneur Steve
Blank) can make or break your idea, so focus your MVP on the soul of your prod-
uct to best learn from these force-multipliers.
According to Matchist.com cofounder, Stella Fayman, in a piece on MVPs for
KISSMetrics, balance these 3 questions to stay on track:
• Are resources dedicated to simplifying the MVP?
• Are the assumptions focused just on the core value?
• Is my timeline as lean as possible?
Focusing on question #2 above is extremely important for anchoring your mini-
malistic approach in customer reality. As Fayman suggests, start by mapping your
functionalities to assumptions and add more layers of functionality into your
MVP only as you prove each assumption. This ensures that no matter the depth
of your feature set, you’re always executing them properly for a consistent early

22
adopter experience.
It can be hard to understand minimalism abstractly, so let’s look at a real-world
example below.
Source: Sell It Before You Build It
At Fliggo (merged with Vidly), Chrys Bader, currently the co-founder and
Chief Product Officer at Secret, wanted to test the assumption that users
would find value in being able to host their own video-streaming site, which at
the time could only be easily accomplished by creating a Wordpress site and
embedding via Youtube. Just the right amount of minimalism was applied above
to create an MVP that allowed Fliggo to not only test if early adopters would sign
up, but also if they were willing to pay.
If demand for the product vision was verified (which it was in this case), the next
iteration of the MVP could test pricing by increasing or decreasing the monthly
fee on the landing page. Such a tweak would be minimalistic by not disrupting
the simple interaction of filling out the form while still focusing the learning even
further.
While it’s cheap and simple, a landing page is not a one-size-fits-all MVP. Startup

23
advisor and founder of Extreme Lean TV, Ramli John, warns against taking a
uniform approach to MVPs. Relying solely on landing pages is dangerous because
you might not able to gather feedback from early adopters who sign up (What
are their problems? What would they like to pay?) and lack of signups might not
be due to the product itself (perhaps the copy is poor or design is distracting).
Ramli advises other low-cost, high-feedback MVPs such as email, blogs, and
video. In fact, as Ramli points out, popular startup and investor matchmaker
AngelList tested its networking value by emailing introductions between startups
seeking funding and active investors — validating its business hypothesis while
still providing a pleasant early adopter experience. By simplifying down to just its
unfair advantage, AngelList created the right MVP.
FOCUS ON THE ASSUMPTIONS TO AVOID SCOPE
CREEP
An important aspect of MVP minimalism is the time dedicated to development,
as this is as precious a resource as money or manpower. Although projects often
experience scope creep, this is arguably one of the most comprehensible aspects
of designing and developing MVPs.
In UXPin, our team collaborates on deciding the amount of time required to complete
certain aspects of the product design. Once we finalize the design and compile our
comments from UXPin, we can plan out the time to production in more detail in a
project management tool like Asana or JIRA.

24
Source: The Wrong Stuff vs. Stuff With Errors
So how long is too long to spend on developing an MVP? Rick Screnta, creator
of the search engine Blekko, maintains that it depends on the product. For
some web applications like Fliggo, a simple landing page was enough. For offer-
ings with higher expectations and greater coverage and attention, MVP develop-
ment can and probably should take longer to avoid negative user backlash that
arise from an overly simplistic or poorly built product. He cites his company’s
search engine, which required 3 years for an MVP, as a primary example of this
assertion.
A more relevant inquiry may be what to build, as opposed to how long—as the
answer to the former question invariably answers the latter. In the illustration
from Signal vs. Noise below, Ryan Singer, a Product Manager at Basecamp,
suggests that minimalism in MVP scope is achieved by maintaining a base quality
of execution and adjusting the number of features accordingly.

25
Source: What Happens to User Experience in a Minimum Viable Product
KISSMetrics founder, Neil Patel, cites some interesting examples of some
notable humble MVP beginnings of varying scope but consistent execution:
• Dropbox — started with a 3 minute video for their MVP, resulting in signups
increasing from 5,000 people to 75,000 overnight—all of this in absence of a
real product
• Foursquare — started from collecting customer feedback using Google Docs
• Virgin Air — began with one plane and one route to validate their assump-
tions, with more planes and routes added as they refined their business
• Groupon — started as a WordPress blog with a widget that sent PDF coupons
via email
Virgin’s MVP was the most resource-intensive, while Foursquare’s MVP was the
most lightweight. However, each MVP was only as complex as the assumptions it
sought to test. More importantly, you’ll notice that each MVP wasn’t over simpli-
fied to where the value proposition and early adopter experience were sacrificed.
Present-day Groupon, for example, still delivers on the value of its MVP by con-

26
solidating coupons for customers via email — just in a sleeker and more refined
interface.
Marcin Treder, CEO and Co-Founder of UXPin, believes the best way to deter-
mine the correct scope of an MVP is to first understand what an MVP is not. ”Unfortu-
nately, the most popular misconception is that an MVP is a minimal product”, Treder
says. “An MVP isn’t the quickest or the most perfect product. Rather, it is a prod-
uct with minimum development effort that creates maximum value.” In order
to achieve this in practice, you must create the smartest test you can design
to either validate or invalidate the hypotheses behind your product. Learning
both what works and what doesn’t are important — you can still find focus by
deduction.
STAY TRUE TO YOUR PRODUCT DNA
Regardless of the tactic, make sure your MVP strategy stays focused on testing
assumptions rather than stripping down features for expediency. As long as your
MVP remains true to your unique value proposition, you can always iterate the
nice-to-haves based on early adopter feedback.
At UXPin, we made sure we conveyed our core value of comprehensive and collabora-
tive design in all our iterations. Our product philosophy is to use an MVP approach to
developing each new feature so that our sprint cycles are as lean as possible.

27
In the illustration above, the “product DNA” of the car is its efficiency at getting
the user from Point A to B versus just walking. Each iteration expands the scope
of the product with more features, but the unique value of faster transportation
remains consistent.
The MVP in this product development example could actually be as simple as an
online poll asking people if they want a quicker way of getting around town — it
is the easiest way to test the unfair advantage with minimum scope (cost, design,
and engineering). Based on early adopter feedback, you could then design a
skateboard and iterate until it becomes a car.
Gagan Biyani, co-founder of Udemy and Sprig, believes that your first MVP
needs to test your core value while further iterations should test new hypotheses.
“MVPs should be focused on being a minimum viable test for hypothesis X, not
just a product,” says Gagan. “Successive MVPs that test different theses will let
you launch faster and better”.
“MVPs should be focused on being a minimum viable test for hypothesis X,
not just a product”
For example, one of Udemy’s early MVPs was a $20 online course filmed by the
co-founders which was used to test the hypothesis that customers would pay for
a high-quality video course. At Sprig, the MVP involved the founding team run-
ning a one-night meal service to validate the hypothesis that food could be deliv-
ered in under 20 minutes. Just like the skateboard illustration, the first MVP vali-
dated the core assumption behind the business, which allowed future iterations
to test more complex hypotheses.
Share
Quote

28
KEEP IT SIMPLE AND EXPERIMENTAL
MVPs succeed by testing if there’s market demand for an alternative without
obsessing over features. By limiting your scope to testing just the core value of
your product, you give yourself room to fail without breaking the bank. Remem-
ber, the goal of an MVP isn’t getting it right, it’s maximizing learning with mini-
mal effort so you don’t go down the wrong path.

29
CHAPTER THREE
THEVINMVP:EXPERTTAKES
ONPRODUCTVIABILITY
How to think about viability before building your next product
Share this ebook
with friends!

30
When it comes to MVPs, it’s easy to get tunnel vision and zoom in on just the
“minimal” part.
But a product that works isn’t enough. It needs to be positioned for long-term
success. Otherwise, you might as well launch your MVP into outer space.
Source: Don’t Let The Minimum Win Over Viable, HBR Blog
As shown above, the prospect of pivoting down the line can lead companies to
iterate without questioning their hypotheses. At every point in the process, teams
focus on adding, removing, changing or tweaking features rather than the pur-
pose for doing so. This leaves them with a polished product at each stage that
may not be viable because it was built for the wrong business reasons. Hence,
the need to keep pivoting.
In this piece, I will help you avoid that mistake by explaining how to explore all
options when building your MVP, the difference between product and business
viability, and how to engage your team to ensure viability.
ESTABLISHING AND SUSTAINING VIABILITY
In UXPin, I can create multiple product prototypes quickly with the feature sets I think
customers want. Then I can personally show them, test each variation and get their
feedback before taking my MVPs and iterations to production. This keeps our team
centered on a well-designed business solution instead of just a technical marvel.

31
Source: Don’t Let The Minimum Win Over Viable, HBR Blog
Unlike the first illustration, the diagram above shows a flexible approach to MVPs
whereby product teams focus on breadth rather than depth at each iteration to
make sure they’re choosing the optimal product path. Once the direction is cho-
sen, then the team dives deep to execute on the product direction.
Even with an Agile methodology, concepts can gain disproportionate traction
because of the team’s past investments and labor. However, ideating on different
user experiences and needs lets you break free from previous commitments to
see the whole landscape. Focusing the team on batches of small iterations lets
you more frequently check if you can build the product, whether customers want
the product, and if they’re actually willing to pay for it.
According to Steve Blank and Bob Dorf, both notable entrepreneurs, a
web service can use multiple landing pages to test viability of different solutions.
As mentioned, an online payment service can be developed into 3 prototypes:
FastPay, EZPay, and FlexiPay. FastPay addresses issues around speed, EZPay
addresses ease of use, and FlexiPay addresses flexibility. Instead of releasing an
MVP that dives deeply into just one customer problem, they minimize risk by
diversifying laterally and then testing to find the best candidate.

32
Diversity and flexibility helps teams see beyond just functionality into the real
customer problems. The above model prevents you from modifying the product
when tweaks to your assumptions about the market are needed.
UNDERSTANDING PRODUCT VS. BUSINESS
VIABILITY
Viability is one of the most contentious and misunderstood aspects of MVPs.
It’s the primary reason businesses and business units fail. And it’s arguably why
there’s such a frenzy among investors, venture capitalists, entrepreneurs, press,
social media elite, and anyone else in tech when early-stage products show great
viability — it just doesn’t happen as often as we’d hope.
Source: Innovation 101
According to Christina Wodtke, former General Manager at Zynga, we need
to look at viability through a business lens to ensure our MVP stays focused on
the market. “You need to Baby Bear it so it’s just right. And typically that’s the
smallest of all efforts.” For many companies, it can be tempting to build the per-
fect viable product simply because they have the resources to do so. Unfortu-
nately, this only leads to disappointment down the line as they soon find out that

33
market conditions won’t allow for scalability beyond just the MVP.
To help you ideate and iterate smarter as you develop your MVP, let’s compare
the definition of a viable product versus a viable business.
DETERMINING PRODUCT VIABILITY
Product viability is defined by feasibility, which requires careful consideration.
Political, legal and other market or product-specific factors must be examined
along with technological factors. To name a few, tax policies, health & safety laws,
and limits of existing technology can all limit early products. For example, Airb-
nb’s feasibility is limited by zoning laws dictating how long paying guests can stay
and Spotify had to remove a portion of tracks due to licensing issues only a year
after its founding. While both companies are doing well now, you can bet those
political and legal issues posed setbacks. The wonder-knife below perhaps exem-
plifies feasibility: if the right conditions permit someone in the world to build it,
then it’s technically feasible.
Source: Textbook Example
Now let’s apply this thinking to a hypothetical situation. A company wants to see
if unmanned drones would be valuable for collecting data on crop health (i.e.

34
whether plants are diseased, if there’s an insect infestation, etc). Amidst a hun-
dred-page spec document, the team verifies that the right spectrometers exist to
detect plant chemicals, the data can be imported into Excel, and FAA regulations
aren’t overly restrictive. The project is deemed technically viable — just like etha-
nol-powered cars and solar power.
But the MVP could ultimately fail because it does not test the viability of business
by verifying market and company capabilities. Can the team cover the cost of
long-term maintenance for the drones? Is the profit margin wide enough to jus-
tify the R&D? The key to testing viability is keeping sustainability in mind, not just
if a product can be built using any combination of technology and under the right
legal, political or other circumstances.
DETERMINING BUSINESS VIABILITY
Going from early adoption to sustainability is one of the hardest stages busi-
nesses experience. Unlike product viability, there are multiple considerations
when thinking about business viability. I’ve expanded on these points below.
Source: The Brown Swan Theory

35
1. DESIRED BY THE MARKET
As we discussed above, perceived market need is often followed by sin-
gle-minded development without measuring and refining the vision. If we con-
tinue the analogy, the UAV team failed to answer perhaps the most crucial ques-
tion of all, which is whether farmers even care about the data in the first place.
Joel Gascoigne, Founder and CEO of Buffer, suggests that the MVP’s sole pur-
pose is to validate learning about what the market currently needs. In our exam-
ple above, the team could have tested the market by renting an airplane, taking
photos and processing the information themselves, and then getting feedback
from farmers. In some cases, you might not even need to build a physical MVP.
Landing pages can be the most cost efficient means of testing demand — cer-
tainly, if a sizeable amount of potential users sign up in anticipation of the prod-
uct, then the product is at least potentially viable.
David Aycan, Design Director at the esteemed design and consultancy
firm IDEO, expands on this distinction between building products that are essen-
tial for customers versus products that are technically feasible. The “Minimum”
in MVP connotes a correct set of features that are important to the customer,
and is not related to ease of technical execution. “Viability” is thus a measure of
the product’s ability to focus on addressing the customer’s core needs in a rev-
olutionary way. “Don’t let the minimum win over the viable”,  as Aycan aptly
advises.
In “Top 10 Ways to Test MVPs”, we’ll actually go into more detail on conventional
and unconventional tactics you can use to test desirability.
2. BUILDABLE BY THE COMPANY
Stella Fayman, a noted expert on entrepreneurship and lean startups,

36
defines viable as getting the job done — leave out all the bells and whistles.
Buildability is achieved by seeing technical feasibility through a minimalist lens,
as the main purpose of the product at this stage is to test assumptions regarding
your product. To this end, asking yourself the right questions are instrumental to
being smart with resources; therefore, optimizing buildability. Here are a few:
• What core functions does our MVP need?
• How do we know if our MVP is successful?
• What do we hope to learn from performance of the MVP?
According to Neil Patel, co-founder of KISSMetrics and advocate of lean
product development, working efficiently in small batches is the key to building
out an MVP. By working in small sprints, team members become more efficient at
evaluating what features are core to the vision and what are extraneous. Frequent
design reviews and code checks keep resources focused on what will get the job
done and makes your team better at what they do. This goes a long way towards
catching red flags — for example, creating code that depends on a certain con-
figuration and then having that configuration change. Working in small batches
reduces development cost since the above mistake could cripple the ROI on your
MVP (the number of signups you get may be irrelevant if the cost of reworking
the code is astronomical).
“Fast and flexible is more important than slower and specialized when
building your MVP team.”
Patrick Neeman, founder of UsabilityCounts.com, advises that you select
multi-talented team members to work in small batches since it takes a village
to build a product. Your MVP team should ideally consist of people who can
tackle product management, interaction & visual design, development, content
creation, and QA. While you don’t need one person for each of these roles, the
Share
Quote

37
responsibilities should all be covered. “Fast and flexible is more important than
slower and specialized when building your MVP team” says Patrick. “If your lean
MVP team can’t wear multiple hats, then that’s a huge liability.”
3. PROFITABLE FOR THE COMPANY
“Asking customers to buy something will yield more relevant insights than sim-
ply asking them if they will buy something”. While surveys can help check if
customers will buy, placing a hurdle in front of the customer will help assign a
dollar value to your idea. For instance, you can place a payment button for a set
amount on your landing page. Once they click the payment button, notify them
the product is still in alpha stage but they will be able to beta test. The people
who completed the process are now ideal early adopters since they’ve shown
they have enough pain to make them open their wallets.
Marcin Treder, CEO and cofounder of UXPin, believes that MVP profitabil-
ity boils down to quality of feedback. “8,000 people who give you their email
address isn’t worth nearly as much as 30 people who are willing to pay now and
offer input.” says Treder. “The goal of an MVP isn’t quantity but quality. What you
learn from those 30 people can help you monetize everyone else.” Getting early
adopters to cross this “penny gap” to become paying customers is perhaps the
hardest part since you’re not just competing with what’s similar, but also with
what’s free.
“8000 email addresses isn’t worth nearly as much as 30 people who will
pay now and offer input”
Neil Patel, cofounder of KISSMetrics, detailed a few tips to help cross this pay
bridge which we’ve adapted for our own purposes below:
• Inform customers that you’ll need to start charging — Do not hide or blind-
Share
Quote

38
side them with a fee when earlier iterations were free. This can drive away
your early adopters.
• Be honest about why you’re charging — Most people understand will under-
stand that an MVP, even in a free market, won’t be free forever.
• Be transparent about costs and profit — Honesty is a great way to build
trust and revealing profit and salary helps people see what’s needed to sustain
the vision.
• Start lower than your target fee — Explaining to early adopters that you’re
charging below the profitable rate is a nice way to ease them into paying for
your product and primes them for future price increases.
Alternatively, you can also “sell first, build later” by using crowdfunding sites
like Kickstarter.com. Unlike landing pages and other MVPs, this tactic can gauge
up-front what customers are already paying for your idea — information that’s
critical since setting the wrong price after you launch could cripple your profita-
bility. Not only will a successful crowdfunding campaign earn you a community of
early adopters, it also sets early expectations around pricing since different levels
of donations receive different levels of product.
“Do whatever it takes to get something into someone’s hands. You’ll learn
more from in-the-flesh customers than any degree of theorycrafting.”
John Saddington, Partner at startup accelerator The Iron Yard, verified that
people were willing to pay for an app that gave them more creative control of
filtered photos than Instagram or Facebook. By using Kickstarter, John actually
raised 113% of his $50,000 goal for his app Pressgram. It worked so well that
Share
Quote

39
he plans on taking the same approach to validating its desktop iteration. “Do
whatever it takes to get something into someone’s hands. You’ll learn more from
in-the-flesh customers than any degree of theorycrafting,” advises John. “That’s
what an MVP is all about.”
HAVE A METHOD FOR THE QUALITATIVE
MADNESS
When it comes to MVP success, it’s important to analyze qualitative and quanti-
tative data. Quantitative data is often more straightforward while qualitative data
can be less actionable. We’ll show how to better understand qualitative data to
inform your quantitative decisions — the two are undoubtedly intertwined.
Source: IFLScience
Lean Startup coach Tristan Kromer believes that evaluating the data of your
MVP is just as important as building the product part. In fact, there’s actually four
parts to an MVP. “The four parts to an MVP are Customer, Channel, Value, and

40
Relationship. If you’re missing one, your feedback loop is broken,” says Tristan.
“You’ve built your product. But did you build in metrics or a marketing channel?
Building doesn’t always mean building product.” 
For more actionable insights, Shopify and Mashable have succinctly outlined
ways you can evaluate the viability of your product ideas and then make your
product viable. While Shopify’s guide is tailored for the physical products which
its merchants sell on the e-commerce platform, many of the same viability crite-
ria apply to digital products.
Assuming you’ve already got a product out the door or are working on one, here
are 4 steps you should take:
• List 30-40 critical success factors — related to your product, customers, trans-
actions, your product category, the environment and more
• Gather and report customer input on these factors — and have each team
member rank them from 1 to 10 to determine how viable a product is at a par-
ticular time
• Combine the scores to get a team score for each factor — then discuss the
rankings in detail face-to-face to better qualify each score, and get the entire
team on the same page
• Plot the scores over time — then you’ll have a better sense of how your suc-
cess factors (i.e the viability of your product in certain respects) changes over
time to gauge your team’s performance in reaching its goals
The answers from the questions above will go a long way towards helping every-
one from engineering to design understand that viability is an ongoing goal
rather than just a process.

41
GIVE YOUR PRODUCT A LIFE OF ITS OWN
To think about viability in the simplest terms, let’s consider that the origin of the
word “viable” actually comes from the Latin word for life.
Unfortunately, the common thinking behind MVPs usually leans towards “What
is the least we can do to create something that won’t fail?” Instead, ask yourself
“What can we deliver that will grow into a life of its own?” With that in mind, go
forward and build your MVP knowing that it is a seed which must grow into a
profitable product.
Source: Homegrown Tips

42
CHAPTER FOUR
PINMVP:EXPERTTAKES
ONPRODUCTQUALITY
How to think about quality when building your next product
Share this ebook
with friends!

43
What is the right level of quality to include in an MVP? It’s not just about how
much time you spend on building the product or how much lipstick you put on
a hoggish product. For you to get this right, you have to really understand your
users, how they’ll use your product, and what will make them really happy — and
really pissed off.
Before going too in-depth on product quality, let’s first look at the overarching
dimensions of what make quality products.
8 DIMENSIONS OF PRODUCT QUALITY
Before rallying your team around quality and delivering quality MVPs, it’s impor-
tant to first think about the dimensions that comprise a quality product.
David A. Garvin, a Harvard Business School professor, wrote extensively
about approaches to defining product quality and the overarching dimensions
of product quality. Although this was written two decades ago, much of it still
applies to contemporary high-tech web and mobile products. Through his anal-
ysis of transcendent, product-based, user-based, manufacturing-based, and val-

44
ue-based approaches to defining product quality, he enumerated 8 dimensions of
product quality I’ve summarized below:
• Performance — a product’s primary operating characteristics
• Features — the “bells and whistles” that supplement basic functioning
• Reliability — the probability of a product malfunctioning within a specified
time period (reliability may perhaps better be defined as the probability of a
product not malfunctioning)
• Conformance — the degree to which a product’s design and operating char-
acteristics meet established standards
• Durability — a measure of product life which also has an economic
component
• Serviceability — the speed, courtesy, competence, and ease of repair of the
product
• Aesthetics — how a product looks, feels, tastes, sounds or smells
• Perceived Quality — the image or reputation of a product
He also elaborates on how product quality may impact product profitability,
advertising, market share, price, and costs — all important factors that impact
business and product viability. Unfortunately, it only scratches the surface but I’ll
definitely share more insights as I come across them.

45
PLAY TO EMOTIONS — DELIGHT EARLY
ADOPTERS
Rand Fishkin, co-founder of Moz, has a different take. In general, he thinks
MVPs suck and companies should aim more for what he calls an EVP — an
Exceptional, Viable Product.
While he’s a long-time proponent of building something small and minimal then
iterating on it, he’s seen a lot of MVPs launch that rarely produce exceptional
value and are, therefore, rarely praise-worthy. Many experts like Steve Blank, a
serial-entrepreneur and author / lecturer on MVPs, insist that influencers
and amplifiers — not just any user or customer — are critical for getting traction,
and if you can’t impress them, then it will be far more difficult to get proper trac-
tion — and, like re-skinning a pig, there’s only so many times you can re-launch
a product. This is becoming true even at later stage companies with massive

46
existing distribution channels, and with serial entrepreneurs and executives with
sizeable followership. Although they may help with initial visitors and signups,
users and customers — especially influencers and early adopters — are hardly
loyal to mediocre products. Products that fail to hit the “A Ha” moment will churn
their user and customer base as quickly as they acquired them.
In practice, Rand suggests making your MVPs in-house and dogfooding them
internally and with a few customers. Gather feedback and iterate until the first
internal and external users find that “A Ha” moment, then release it to the wild as
an EVP. This may take an extra 30-90+ days to reach this point but, in his opin-
ion, it’s well worth the wait. “The MVP has biased too many startups to think
about what’s minimum rather than what’s viable,” advises Rand. “Don’t be mini-
mum, be exceptional.”
“The MVP has biased too many startups to think about what’s minimum
rather than what’s viable.”
To illustrate my point, let’s look at a user’s experience of Apple’s Magic Mouse
compared to an alternative product, MagicPrefs. In the diagram below, Brian
Donohue, describes his experience using Apple’s mouse. While his initial expec-
tations of the Magic Mouse aren’t higher, Brian ends up loving it after experienc-
ing the value of a feature he didn’t even know he needed. In his eyes, Apple cre-
ates a truly delightful technology — a mouse with a trackpad that can support a
bunch of different gestures and actions — by limiting the functionality to a small
percentage of what it’s capable of (i.e. displaying dramatic design restraint).
Share
Quote

47
Source: Apple’s Magic Mouse: An Example of Taking “Design Restraint” Too Far?
Meanwhile, MagicPref sets higher expectations for what users can do with their
product and, therefore, runs the risk of severely disappointing users when they
do actually remember how to use all of the features. Eventually, committed
power users will adjust their habits to get into a personal groove. But odds are
that t everyday consumers will just opt for a less complex product like Apple’s
Magic Mouse that has a delightful twist compared to other alternatives.

48
Source: Apple’s Magic Mouse: An Example of Taking “Design Restraint” Too Far?
At UXPin, every team member can review and revise our product designs throughout
the process in real-time from anywhere. Having the right eyeballs looking at every
detail of what we’re trying to accomplish with our MVPs, my team is able to deliver
higher-quality products that our users want. Customer support, sales, marketing,
design, engineering, and product teams and, of course, our CEO are all able to give
their input without any hurdles. Of course, we still use whiteboards, sketches, pres-
entations, and other tools depending on how we need to communicate with one
another. But it all gets recorded back in UXPin. It’s pretty fantastic.
ADD LOGICAL VALUE — HELP THEM DO
SOMETHING
Josh Puckett, product designer at Dropbox, states that assessing quality level
is contingent on the goals being set for the MVP. “Design has a single goal for

49
an MVP,” says Josh. “Help users easily understand the value your product adds
to their lives. Don’t distract from this. That is to say, if the quality level (or lack
thereof) makes it hard for the user to accomplish the goals set forth, then not
enough quality is present in the MVP offering. From his perspective, it’s often
helpful to put your MVP through a quick test to see if more time needs to be
spent on design:
1. Is there friction due to poor design that impedes users from accomplishing
your goals?
2. Is the design and user experience at level that you would feel comfortable
shipping to all of your users, as a final product?
If your MVP fails either litmus test, he suggests you slow down and revisit the
product design. He’s not saying the product has to be pixel and animation-per-
fect. Rather, he’s trying to avoid obvious pain points and poor interactions that
may corrupt the insights you’re supposed to gain from an MVP — if users are
annoyed or confused by your product, their actions in the product won’t make
much sense… if they even stay that long.
Brandon Schauer, CEO of Adaptive Path, shares a framework he’s used over
the years to help teams think through a successful customer experience in the
short-term and long-term — The Cupcake Model. “The MVP is one of the most
referenced and least understood concepts in modern product development" 
says Brandon. “Embrace the reality, not the hype.” He details two drastically dif-
ferent approaches, the Dry Cake and the Cupcake model, highlighting the superi-
ority of the latter approach.
In the Dry Cake model, product teams start with a very basic product that may
not be very interesting — like a plain dry cake. Then they add new features such
as icing or filling to get a more interesting and complete end product. This is the
approach many organizations take, unfortunately. While it makes great sense

50
operationally, it’s problematic from a competitive and customer perspective. As
he puts it, “cake with no filling or icing isn’t that appealing. Plus, anyone can just
make a cake.”
.Source: the cake model of product planning
In the Cupcake model, product teams start with a smaller yet complete product
that is likely more desirable. It has cake, icing, and filling — a tasty treat for any-
one looking for a sweet treat that will get the job done between meals. Think
about the craziness of gourmet cupcakes: three tiny cupcakes cost just as much
as a large, plain cake in the store even though they’re half the volume or less.
People want a complete product, and they’ll pay for it. It also sets you apart from
the bland or chaotic alternatives.
Source: the cake model of product planning
Stephen P. Anderson, UX consultant and author of “Seductive Interactive
Design”, believes the cupcake model of creating a complete experience is crucial
since many companies compete in mature markets. “The MVP has been (ab)used
to justify sub-par product experiences where quality is sacrificed for speed" 
says Stephen. “If you’re building something entirely new, a buggy prototype can
be good for learning. More often than not though, you’ll be competing in mature
spaces where others have already set the bar for quality and a poor experience

51
can produce misleading data.”
Knowing the market and being honest about your MVP is the best gut check on
quality. If you’re truly first-to-market, then you may be able to release something
a little clunkier if the idea is innovative. On the other hand, if you’re coming in as
the underdog, don’t even think about skimming on quality.
LEVERAGE NETWORKS — DON’T RELY ON THEM
The importance of this aspect of MVPs can not be stressed enough.
In fact, Gerard J. Tellis, a professor at the USC Business School, believes
that product quality has become so important in recent years, that not only has it
shown to be more significant than network effects but that network effects actu-
ally reinforced quality by driving users and customers to quality, even superior,
products. Generally speaking, he noted that brand loyalty — and, therefore, net-
work effects — were so weak that market dominance tended to shift every few
years in various industries.
Marcin Treder, Co-Founder CEO of UXPin, agrees with this sentiment but sees
more products requiring network effects to exist in the first place. “The caveat is
that networks are becoming increasingly important to many contemporary prod-
ucts such as ad platforms, social networks, peer-to-peer marketplaces, transpor-
tation, payments, and so forth,” Marcin states, “Nevertheless, if a network is core
to the product, then it would be attributed to the product quality as opposed to a
distinctly different phenomenon.”
Fundamentally, you need to capture the heart and mind of a single user before
you can make their friends, family, peers and broader network care about you

52
themselves. Beyond rigid buying processes, security, and user management
constraints, many business applications traditionally haven’t been that viral, in
part, because they failed to make the end user care — the products were far from
pretty or easy to use, and everyone could forget about them by 5pm; no big deal.
That’s now changing but mostly because business apps are building for the user
as much as for the overall business. Remember that every time you have a meet-
ing about increasing your K-Factor.
QUALITY VARIES BY MVP PURPOSE
There are many technical and design considerations when building a product.
There’s no one-size-fits-all design and engineering formula for MVPs.
“Bad code only becomes technical debt when people use your MVP. If you
pivot and build a different product, then it never becomes debt.”
Kevin Dewalt, Founder of SoHelpful, makes an interesting point regarding an
MVP’s quality as it relates to technical debt. He asserts that technical debt (e.g.
writing poor code or designing poor functionality) can be acceptable since code,
features, or design may be temporary for most MVPs.
For instance, if you’re building an MVP to validate assumptions with a clear intent
on discarding the offering later to build a more robust offering, then suboptimal
code and/or design can be an advantage in getting to market faster. “Bad code
only becomes technical debt when people use your MVP,” says Kevin. “If you
decide to pivot and build a different product, then it never becomes debt.”
Share
Quote

53
FOCUS ON A COMPLETE PRODUCT INSTEAD OF
COMPLETE FEATURES
As you can see, product quality is far more than aesthetics or technical
breakthroughs.
It has far more to do with deeply understanding your user, being considerate of
every aspect of the product you want to build, and being able to capture the loy-
alty of individual users (as opposed to vast networks of followers) through adding
real-life value and delighting the user. This requires building a complete product
in version 1 that can be expanded and improved continuously as opposed to
building a partial product and adding distinct layers on top of it.
Your ability to think roughly a few versions ahead will make life dramatically
easier — but remember, you’ll always need to adjust future versions as you learn
from the prior MVPs.

54
CHAPTER FIVE
BALANCINGPRODUCTUX
ANDLEANEXECUTION
Dealing with these competing priorities at every product stage
Share this ebook
with friends!

55
What matters more: a killer UX that makes people want to use your product, or
shipping quickly the things people want and staking down a huge share of the
market?
Source: Viral Heat
If the UX is bad, people won’t want to use it. On the other hand, if someone else
gets there first, people are happy to use what is available and help to improve
it with feedback as it grows. People have been struggling with these opposing
interests forever so we thought it important to outline a better way to think about
the problem, depending on your company’s stage.
It’s important to remember that this is only a framework and that your actual
course of action will be as personal as your business and products. But if you’re
simply trying trying to “wedge in” design excellence while rushing your product
releases to market, then you’re already on the wrong path.

56
COMPETING PRIORITIES:
EXPERIENCE VS. EXECUTION
EXPERIENCE
Great UX is absolutely critical, there’s no question about that. Q Manning at
Code Mag sums up his thoughts on the matter rather well:
“Finding a well-developed app isn’t that difficult. Many low-rated apps are
responsive and bug free. So what do these top apps all have in common?... The
top-selling apps have a fantastic user experience (UX). The best apps do more
than accomplish their goals; they transport users into a preternatural state of
clairvoyance, where each tap is intuitive and never requires second guessing.”
That sounds pretty sweet in theory, but UX rarely reaches that state of perfec-
tion. We debate this regularly at UXPin while reviewing UI designs, prioritizing
features, planning the product roadmap, and so forth for our wireframing and
prototyping app. UX involves how people use your product, what they experience
when they do, and how they feel about that. It’s such a broad definition that few
companies think about it the same way — see one of the many convoluted UX
frameworks available below.

57
Source: Kicker Studio, “The Disciplines of User Experience”
EXECUTION
The opposing interest is called, in the language of the Lean Startup model, the
Minimal Viable Product (MVP). Lean product development instructs you to get a
working prototype, ship quickly, get feedback, fix it, and do it again.
The simple fact is that it just isn’t possible to fully comprehend what good UX
means in your particular case until you actually have some dedicated users. Get
the basics, communicate your core concept and then get some fingers on the
buttons. This is where setting user expectations matters most. If you just need
some beta testers, don’t promote it as a launch. You actually have more control
over user expectations than you think. Many people are willing to try something
new and clunky for the coolness factor alone.

58
However you look at it, you need something out there. And there are many ways
to conceptualize your initial product. If you need to brush up, take a look into our
free ebook, The Guide to Wireframing — and keep tabs on our Product Design
Library for new e-books on prototyping and more.
I. VIABLE BUSINESS
Although there are MVP success stories like Dropbox, which used a bare bones
approach to go from 0 to $1 billion in valuation over four years, MVP more often
leads directly to a Minimum Viable Business (MVB) which builds revenues and
traffic more slowly and reliably. The questions you should ask yourself over and
over again: can it make money?
Source: Jon Yongfook, “21 Actionable Growth Hacking Tactics”

59
II. FEASIBLE PRODUCT
Building a MVB is only part of the story, though. The next step up is making sure
your fantasy product can be built with the time, money, resources, and techni-
cal capabilities today. It’s critical to be honest with yourself here because a lot of
people grossly underestimate or flat out ignore this part. You can’t really move
onto the next step without the product being feasible.
III. DESIRABLE PRODUCT
And, finally, your product has to be desirable, a Minimum Desirable Product
(MDP). This concept was introduced by Andrew Chen, who defined it as “the
simplest experience necessary to prove out a high-value, satisfying product expe-
rience for users, independent of viability.” This guide will help you safely navigate
the waters of New Product Development, along with advice on when to focus on
UX or Lean and to what degree at each stage of the process.
Source: Intercom, “Asking Questions Beats Giving Advice”
Aarron Walter, Director of UX at MailChimp and author of “Designing
for Emotion”, echoes a similar sentiment that UX is the key to desirability,

60
even at the MVP stage. “At first, the primary focus is on usability and learnability.
But these days, it’s easy to build an app and get it on the market,” says Aarron.
“What’ll make your app stand out from the crowd? Personality, a point of view,
an ethos — features can come later, but personality needs to be there from your
very first release.”
THE STAGES OF PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
The most salient factor that determines how much to focus on UX or lean design
is the current stage of the development cycle.
One unique aspect of the design process that can be frustrating is that it is
path-dependent. Everything is open at the sketching stage, but after that, early
decisions put constraints on what is possible later in development. Unless the
team is going to scrap everything and start from scratch, which is not always
desirable or even possible, additions have to blend in to the existing design.
Reduce your uncertainty early for a more successful project all around.
This implies a strategy of reducing the project scope so that all of your resources
can be devoted to solving a problem that is fairly well understood. Design simply,
get it right, and move on. You are not shooting for perfection but a high-function-
ing product so you can refine and enhance the core in the next stages of design
and development.
Here is a brief breakdown of the three market stages and where your focus needs
to be.
I. THE TECHNOLOGY STAGE — LITTLE UX, ALL LEAN
1. Objective — Assembling the plan together and figuring out what the market

61
needs
2. Key considerations — Focus on MVP, with an emphasis on the Viable. You
can’t focus on UX yet is because you don’t have any users yet. You know who
could use it, but you don’t know who will. Get a working prototype together
and get it out there to find out who needs it and how they are using it in the
real world.
3. Success criteria — Consumers outside the beta test want to use it.
II. FEATURE STAGE — LIMITED UX, LESS LEAN
1. Objective — Settle on the most important features to develop based on user
demand.
2. Key considerations — Start molding the UX as part of the decision process
to engender specific emotional responses for the user. Do you want them to
feel confident, curious or hungry for more? Keep a close eye on what features
competitors offer, but don’t be in a hurry to get anything out the door until
they work properly with the right UX.
3. Success criteria — Users comment about how they are using it and how they
feel about it.
III. EXPERIENCE STAGE — ALL UX, NO LEAN
1. Objective — Researching what users are doing with your product means
everything at this point.
2. Key considerations — Forget about adding features unless absolutely neces-
sary. What are the biggest pain points customers have with using your prod-
uct? How much trouble would it be for them to switch to a competitor now?

62
This is a good time to study winning UX designs from around the world and
figure out how to apply these insights to your product. The Hierarchy of Efforts
is a great way to structure your UX improvements at this point.
3. Success criteria — Unsolicited customer referrals and viral adoption.
At UXPin, our wireframing and prototyping app is admittedly still at Stage II in this
process. That said, we have done a lot of customer development and dramatically
improved our core product recently to create a more complete and enjoyable experi-
ence. Soon we’ll be ready for Stage III, optimizing UX, and that will be a really exciting
time for us — and our users.
UX DESIGN VS. LEAN DESIGN
The two opposing forces really aren’t all that different since the user is in the driv-
er’s seat. The sooner you get on board with their needs, the more successful your
product will be. Nobody cares that your product does a million things. They only
care if it works for them when they open the box.
Here is a quick rundown of what each process looks like for designing a new app.
EXAMPLE OF A UX DESIGN PROCESS
1. Identify people, problem, project — People need an app that turns a week of
recipes into a shopping list instantly.
2. Generate lo-fi prototypes — Based on recipe apps and shopper apps, cobble
together a shopping engine and try to actually use it at a store
3. Design — This is where UX and creativity really have to get serious.

63
4. Get Buy-in — Gather stakeholders and measure the excitement. This is the
most undervalued stage and the point where products go bad due to lack of
backing or not listening to users.
EXAMPLE OF A LEAN DESIGN PROCESS
1. Observe and Brainstorm — People shop by category (dairy, meats, vegetables)
and make meals out of what is available. An ingredient focus can change the
shopping experience.
2. Minimal Viable Product — Get feedback from a user test group on a bare
bones recipe-to-shopping-list converter app.
3. Gather feedback and iterate — Maybe the shopping list isn’t the problem, it’s
finding recipes easily based on lifestyle choices. Find out where the real prob-
lem lies and start over from there.
“Universal design principles have existed a long time and they are here to
stay. If you think your next big app can do without, think again.”
According to Jan Jursa, author of “UX Storytellers” and cofounder of
MOBX Conference, the more mature the market in which your product is
launching, the more you’ll want to favor a UX design process. For him, going MVP
is not an invitation to skimp on fundamental product qualities. “Universal design
principles have existed a long time and they are here to stay. If you think your
next big app can do without, think again,” says Jan. “Elements such as harmony
and hierarchy are an investment in the perceived experience of every product, as
is usability.”
Share
Quote

64
STAY LEAN — WITH YOUR EYE ON UX
Lean UX is gaining currency in the design world as companies try to fold the two
approaches together seamlessly.
Source: Dean Meyers
The first key to achieving that in the real world is to keep UX as a goal in every
stage of design and development, even when the focus is on getting the product
into users hands. That way, when UX becomes more important, the design can
easily incorporate the necessary changes.
The second key is more feedback from all stakeholders. That doesn’t mean try
to please everyone, but it does mean that the funding sources and manage-
ment team are just as valuable a resource as the users when it comes time for
implementation.
“Launch with the most optimized site that you can improve rather
than overhaul. Your site is not carved in stone.”
Frank Lloyd Wright probably said it better than anyone: “You can use an
eraser on the drafting table or a sledge hammer on the construction site.” It is
far more effective to use an eraser early because customers don’t really appreci-
Share
Quote

65
ate it when you take a sledgehammer to what they see as “their” website. Launch
with the most optimized site that you can improve rather than overhaul. Your site
is not carved in stone. It should evolve and change based on user needs and the
potentials unleashed by new technology.

66
CHAPTER SIX
TOP15WAYSTOTEST
MINIMUMVIABLEPRODUCT
Important techniques for startups and established companies alike
Share this ebook
with friends!

67
TESTING YOUR MVP
Though the MVP provides a means to test hypotheses as a starting point, it does
not imply that it is easy to build. The idea behind this exercise is not to see if the
product can be built in terms of technical feasibility. Rather, it is to see whether
you should be building it in the first place and, more importantly, whether it’s
solving a problem other people find worth paying for.
Source: Dropbox
Vladimir Blagojevic, founder of Grant Snap & Lean Startup Circle Brus-
sels writes about the importance of building a product that people want to use
and pay for. In order to reach that stage, however, you need to make sure your
product passes certain tests. Time and money are valuable resources and wasting
them on building a product that doesn’t meet that criteria is out of the question.
MVP tests are designed not just to answer technical questions about the product,
but also to test fundamental business hypotheses about the viability of the mar-
ket it exists in. For example, a company wants to see if unmanned drones would
be valuable for collecting data on the crop health. The project may be deemed

68
technically viable, but the MVP could ultimately fail because it does not test the
viability of business by verifying market and company capabilities.
The complexity of your MVP depends on the type of product you’re building, and
different kinds of MVPs can range from vague Adwords tests to early prototypes.
Once you determine the hypotheses you need to test with your MVP, here are
some of the testing techniques you can put to use to get reliable data from actual
users and utilize it:
1. Customer Interviews
2. Landing Pages
3. A/B Tests
4. Ad Campaigns
5. Fundraising
6. Explainer Videos
7. Piecemeal MVPs
8. SaaS & PaaS
9. Blogs
10. Manual-First (aka “Wizard of Oz”) MVP
11. Concierge MVPs
12. Digital Prototypes
13. Paper Prototypes
14. Single-Feature MVPs
15. Pre-Order Pages

69
1. CUSTOMER INTERVIEWS
“In a startup no facts exist inside the building, only opinions,” says Steve Blank,
co-author of The Startup Owner’s Manual and creator of the Customer Develop-
ment Methodology. In his book The Four Steps to the Epiphany, he talks about
the Customer Problem Presentation, an important part of the customer validation
process that helps you test your hypotheses with actual customers.
Source: Driving Corporate Innovation: Design Thinking vs. Customer Development
This is essentially an unscripted interview with customers designed to elicit infor-
mation about the problem your product is trying to solve. These interviews are
meant to be exploratory rather than as a sales pitch for your product, functional
or otherwise. This process can be continued by listing down the problems you
assume your product will solve and then asking what the customer thinks about
them as well as how they would rank each problem.
These interviews can be a goldmine of actionable information, because even if
your assumed problems turn out to be not as important to the customer, you still
have valuable data that can help pivot your offering.
2. LANDING PAGES
The “Landing Page” is the first page visitors and potential customers visit when

70
they’re led down the funnel towards your product. It’s a marketing opportunity
where you can explain your product’s features and have them sign up, but at the
same time and for the same reasons, it’s also a great MVP that lets you test your
product against real-world market expectations.
Source: Idea to Paying Customers in 7 Weeks - How We Did It
Landing pages are often misused as glorified email capture pages, but they can
be used more extensively to test the product. Joel Gascoigne fleshed out the first
landing page for Buffer and used that to gauge demand for various features and
price plans rather than just to build up a mailing list. This was as simple as add-
ing an extra page between the features page and the signup form; the interstitial
page showed a pricing table, and the visitors could select the plan that appealed
to them. These extra clicks not only showed the visitor’s interest in the product,

71
but also gave the team real-world data on what kind of pricing would be appro-
priate for the market.
Kate Rutter, instructor at Tradecraft and co-founder of Luxr, is a big fan of
using landing pages to “sell first, build later”. In order to be most effective, land-
ing pages need to be able to provide the right information to customers in the
right context. Remember that the objective is validated learning, so collecting
visitor analytics with tools like Google Analytics, KISSmetrics or CrazyEgg is the
most important part of it. You also need an effective value proposition and call to
action. For even further learning, you can also run A/B tests on the page’s con-
tent to help nail down what kind of pitch works best for conversion.
3. A/B TESTS
A/B Tests are used to test the effectiveness of any changes to your product or
marketing. Various analytics tools can be used to test how visitors react to the
design decisions you make, eliminating the guesswork when it comes to improv-
ing the product. A/B testing allows you to test two versions of the page or mar-
keting copy and lets visitor interactions determine which one performs best.
Source: The Ultimate Guide to A/B Testing

72
A portion of your visitors see version A, while the rest see version B. In the end,
using data gathered by analytics tools like Optimizely, Unbounce or Google
Analytics, you can measure each version’s performance on a set of metrics like
bounce rates, conversion or usage.
4. AD CAMPAIGNS
Perhaps counterintuitively, ad campaigns are a great way of running market val-
idation surveys. Google and Facebook are platforms that allow you to drill down
demographics to the particular target customer you’re trying to reach, and this
lets you run a low-fidelity test to see which features or aspects of your product
are most appealing to them.
Source: How to Use UTM Parameters

73
Running a campaign through these services gives you statistics like click-through-
rates and conversions which can be valuable information in determining what
your product will be and how it will run. These can be combined with A/B tests.
Competition in the search marketing space is fierce, so it’s important to remem-
ber that running an Adwords campaign for your MVP is not going to get you a lot
of exposure. But for testing your hypotheses and learning, it’s priceless.
5. FUNDRAISING
Crowdfunding websites like Kickstarter and Indiegogo, among others, also pro-
vide a great platform for running MVP tests. These websites are essentially collec-
tions of MVPs where the market response is judged by the interest people show
in the form of contributions to the campaigns. This combines the benefits of
validated learning with fundraising for product development and even gives you
access to a group of highly interested and actively involved early-adopters who
have a stake in the success of your product which is great for building word-of-
mouth as well as continuous feedback along the way.

74
Source: Pebble, E-Paper Watch for iPhone and Android
You don’t need to look far to hear about success stories that began as Kickstarter
campaigns. The Pebble e-paper smartwatch and Ouya gaming console are
perhaps the more popular ones, raising millions of dollars and building buzz
even before development began. Of course, some of the hallmark features of
campaigns include a compelling narrative, effective explainer videos and useful
rewards or incentives for people to back the project.
6. EXPLAINER VIDEOS
If a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video demonstrating your products
user experience is worth a million. The most famous example of a startup using
an explainer video to validate the market and sell their MVP is Dropbox. They
began with a 3 minute video that demonstrated Dropbox’s intended functionality,
which resulted in signups increasing from 5,000 people to 75,000 overnight—
all of this in absence of a real product. Of course it also helped that the video

75
was targeted to tech-savvy early-adopters who appreciated the easter eggs and
humorous references in the video.
“If a picture is worth a thousand words, then a video demonstrating your
product’s user experience is worth a million.”
Source: Dropbox
Dropbox’s explainer video served as a brilliant validation of the market before
the founders ever had to invest in the infrastructure and development needed
for a high-tech product like theirs to reach a functional level in the real world.
Reaching the target customers is difficult enough, especially when you’re design-
ing to solve a problem that many users might not even recognize they have. For
Dropbox, perhaps saying they were offering a “seamless file-synchronization app”
wouldn’t have the same impact. The explainer video instead walks potential cus-
tomers through what the product is and clearly demonstrates how it helps them,
eventually leading to why they would want to pay for it.
Share
Quote

76
7. PIECEMEAL MVPS
As a mix of Wizard of Oz and Concierge techniques, the Piecemeal MVP means
putting together a functioning demo of your product using existing tools and ser-
vices to deliver the experience instead of building anything yourself. For example
Groupon, in its early stages, was a combination of WordPress, Apple Mail and
an AppleScript that generated PDFs manually as orders were received from the
website.
Source: The Point
Rather than investing time and money into building your own infrastructure, the
product can be built using other existing platforms and services as the founda-
tion, effectively using bits and pieces from various sources to make your version
of the product.

77
8. SAAS & PAAS
Instead of investing in scalable server technology, relying on cloud platforms like
Amazon Web Services, Heroku and MongoDB, Facebook Connect, services like
Chargify, Mixpanel, Mailchimp, Google Forms and LiveChat or even platforms like
WordPress and Drupal are all great pieces in the jigsaw puzzle that is your MVP
test. These services and platforms help you in the development process, speeding
up the time it takes to get your MVP to market. Groupon for example, began life
as a customized WordPress website where the founders posted deals and manu-
ally emailed PDFs to subscribers in the spirit of validating their market potential.
Design and development frameworks can prove to be useful shortcuts for saving
time and money. There are multitudes to choose from, some of the most popular
ones being Twitter Bootstrap, ZURB Foundation, Ruby on Rails, Django, bootstrap.
js or even frameworks like Node.js.

78
Using a framework or library can significantly speed up your development
time. They provide ample documentation and make it extremely easy to get up
and running with your MVP. Many of the problems developers face like cross-
browser compatibility, mobile-friendly design or code optimization are already
taken care of, leaving you free to focus on building your MVP rather than the
design or development that is meant to support it.
9. BLOGS
Blogs are a great way of validating ideas with the right target market using min-
imal effort. Blogging platform Ghost, and App.net began in concept on their
founders’ blogs where they continued to flesh out their ideas and gain support
from a community of followers and supporters.
Source: Project Ghost

79
The two-way communication from blogs gives an ideal platform to build momen-
tum and gather customer feedback in the MVP development process. Addition-
ally, blogs can also serve as early prototypes of your product. Eric Ries, author
of The Lean Startup also began his book as a blog, building an audience and
demand before signing any publishing deals. Similarly, so did 50 Shades of Grey!
10. MANUAL-FIRST (AKA “WIZARD OF OZ”) MVP
Rather than building a video or coding a framework, an alternate option for the
initial stages of market validation is to deliver the product or service manually.
The “Wizard of Oz” MVP comes from the idea of putting on the impression of
full functionality, essentially faking it until you make it. Customers believe they
are experiencing the actual product, but in reality the work behind the scenes is
being done manually.
Source: How I Started ZeroCater
Arram Sabeti, founder of ZeroCater started with a giant spreadsheet which
he used to keep track of companies and caterers he could connect with. Zappos
began the same way, with its founder Nick Swinmurn putting up photos of

80
shoes from local shoe stores on a website to gauge demand for an online store.
When someone ordered the shoe online, he would come back to the store and
buy it. Instead of first investing in infrastructure and inventory, this gave Zappos
a chance to answer the question of whether their product would be accepted by
the market.
This approach also allow for greater interaction with customers at this crucial
stage when you’re designing the product. Observing actual customer first-hand is
always more useful than a hypothetical customer survey, and it’s the fastest way
to discover whether it’s solving a real customer problem. The expedited learn-
ing, albeit at a small-scale, provides opportunities to test many assumptions you
might be making about the product or the marketplace. By doing it all manually,
you give yourself the chance to try different things on-the-fly to see how custom-
ers react before you scale. To the customer of course, the product works and the
behind-the-scenes work doesn’t matter.
These MVPs undoubtedly require a significant effort, but can be ultimately worth
it for the focus they provide on the problem rather than the solution. Zappos for
example, eventually grew into one of the most successful online businesses and
was acquired by Amazon for $1.2 billion in 2009.
11. CONCIERGE MVPS
The Concierge test is similar to the Wizard of Oz MVP, except instead of faking a
working product, you’re upfront about the manual work and the product or ser-
vice is delivered as a highly customized service to selected customers.

81
Source: Defining your vision with a minimum viable product
Rent the Runway tested its online dress rental business model by providing an
in-person service to female college students where anyone could try the dress on
before renting them. This validated their riskiest hypothesis that women would
rent dresses and served as a great concierge MVP that put the business in front
of customers and got them feedback.
Time is valuable, especially at this stage and and running through the process
manually also reveals other aspects of the customer experience that can prove
valuable further on. Instead of putting in resources towards building a real prod-
uct, these MVP tests can answer the more important question first: are you build-
ing something that customers will use and pay for?
12. DIGITAL PROTOTYPES
Mockups, wireframes and prototypes can be used to demonstrate the product’s

82
functionality in a way that mimics the actual usage. These prototypes MVPs can
range from low-fidelity sketches to screenshot previews to more complicated
“dummy” applications that demo the user experience.
Source: UXPin
You can use collaborative wireframing and prototyping tools like UXPin that let
you express what you want to build and share those ideas transparently with the
team.
13. PAPER PROTOTYPES
Similar to Digital Prototypes, except these are physical, either made of cutouts
or even sketched on paper to demonstrate your product and its user experience.
The advantage with paper prototypes for MVP testing is that they can be used by
anyone on the team and require very little explaining because it hands you an
actual representation of the product.

83
Source: Caryn Vainio, Winnie Chang, Adrian Kosmaczewski
For physical product development like phones or chairs etc. this technique is
invaluable. We cover digital and paper prototyping in greater detail in our Guide
to Wireframing e-Book.
14. SINGLE-FEATURE MVPS
Oftentimes it may be best to focus on a single feature of your minimum viable
product to save development time as well as prevent users from being distracted
with what the product is primarily supposed to be.

84
Source: Foursquare scores despite its flaws
Foursquare, for example, began with the simple idea of letting users check-in
to the social network with their location. The first versions of their app reflected
this simplicity. Buffer started out with just Twitter support and only one account
per user. These restrictions help you narrow down the initial customers and focus
on the more important problems, like testing product and market viability rather
than worrying about adding support for other mobile platforms.
15. PRE-ORDER PAGES
Similar to the fundraising MVP, the Pre-Order Page MVP lets you present your
product to potential customers with the aim of enticing them enough to pay for it
before you even build it.

85
Source: Oculus Rift
Oculus Rift, the virtual reality gaming kit, launched a pre-order page for its
development kit before they began production. A lot of projects on Kickstarter
begin as pre-orders. This can show you how much demand exists for the product
you’re trying to build, giving you an indication of whether you should continue
or scrap the project. The problem with offering a pre-order is of course that cus-
tomers might be wary of the possibility that you will not deliver with the product
you promise. Nobody likes vaporware, and users who back a project in such early
stages demand a return on their faith in you, and of course, on their money.
GETTING OUT THE DOOR
In some ways, building a MVP actually creates additional work because this pro-
cess of iteration and validated learning requires significant investment of time

86
and energy. That’s why it’s important not to get bogged down by unnecessary
details and overhead when building MVPs. Eventually, the objective is to figure
out if the effort you’re putting in is worth it, and you don’t want to spend time
working on something users don’t find useful or want to pay for.
It’s also important to realize that when testing your hypotheses, you might want
to consider using multiple MVP testing techniques. The one that fits your busi-
ness model and market best will undoubtedly vary. But the important lesson to
take away here is to go out and build it. Think about the biggest assumption your
product is making and build an MVP that tests that hypothesis in the market.

87
CHAPTER SEVEN
BUILDINGMINIMUMVIABLE
PRODUCTSATSPOTIFY
Design & development cycle insights from a top-tier product team
Share this ebook
with friends!

88
Many companies face the paradox of wanting to build a delightful product with-
out knowing if people actually want the product until it’s released.
Source: How Spotify Stays Lean
Spotify’s vision was to give people the right music at the right time while incen-
tivizing artists by paying them based on number of shares their music received.
A tall order, no doubt, when you consider how hard it is to build out such a plat-
form, let alone make it profitable. Yet Spotify defied the odds and grew from zero
to over 1 million paying subscribers in the US — a market foreign to Spotify’s
native Swedish team and one already teeming with competitors.
So how did they develop a product that fulfilled their vision without driving them
into bankruptcy? They took an iterative approach combining elements from Lean
Startup, Agile, and MVP methodologies.
To achieve its current 10 million paying and 24+ million total user base, Spotify
set out a basic roadmap of prototyping early and cheaply, launching only when
a baseline of quality was met, and then iterating based on user feedback. In this
piece, I’ll explain the goals of each stage and how they all contributed to a sus-
tainable product development cycle.

89
LEAN & AGILE AT SPOTIFY
According to Henrik Kniberg, Agile and Lean Startup consultant and
author, Spotify uses a 4-stage iterative product cycle (Think It, Build It, Ship It,
Tweak It) that emphasizes small teams (referred to as ‘squads’) completing small
batches of work while producing a complete product. Let’s take a look at the
goals of each stage:
• Think It — Decide what product to build, then build prototypes and test via-
bility internally.
• Build It — Create a physical MVP ready for user testing.
• Ship It — Gradually release the MVP to all users while collecting data and
improving.
• Tweak It — Iterate continuously based on feedback until product is shut
down or revamped (returning us to Think It).
Sound familiar? It should. It’s essentially a hybrid process combining practices
from Lean Startup and the Agile Methodology.
PRINCIPLES OF LEAN
Lean Startup uses a “Build-Measure-Learn” cycle to reduce waste while achieving
quality, speed, and customer alignment. At the heart of Lean Startup is the MVP,
a quickly and cheaply produced quality product for learning purposes. Therefore,
Lean Startup eliminates the idea that a team can build what it “knows” it will
need in the future.
To that degree, each one of Spotify’s four stages are Lean since small teams are
always working smartly to test assumptions. The “Think It” stage tests the merit

90
of conceptual MVPs while the “Build It” stage releases a physical MVP only after
it’s been tested for quality. The “Ship It” and “Tweak It” phases ensure long-term
quality and customer alignment by releasing the MVP gradually, learning from
feedback, and iterating tirelessly. Spotify does deviate slightly from Lean, how-
ever, since the “Think It” stage only tests prototypes internally — Lean empha-
sizes customer testing as often as possible.
Source: Entrepreneurs Love to Learn
PRINCIPLES OF AGILE
Lean thinking is necessary in order to develop the mentality needed for Agile
practices.
While Lean is used to efficiently define and build a marketable product, Agile is
the means to accomplish this in software development.
Team members from all disciplines collaborate on short bursts of work (sprints
lasting 1-4 weeks), and in doing so, react better to requirements changes. The

91
Spotify strategy stresses this collaboration by preserving the same product team
throughout all four stages. These sprints are especially important for keeping
resources in check during the “Build It”, “Ship It”, and “Tweak It” phases when all
the heavy lifting is done. All the testing and validating in each phase also keeps
Spotify on the Lean path even if product requirements must change to reflect
customer and market needs.
Source: Agile Methodology
I. THINK IT
Before committing resources to a project, companies need to evaluate the via-
bility of the idea. The “Think It” stage consists of small teams asking themselves
“Why?” rather than just “How?” At Spotify, this phase is the conceptual stage of
the MVP since viability is assessed and minimalist solutions like landing pages
and prototypes are used to test user demand.

92
Source: How Spotify Builds Products
According to Christina Wodtke, former General Manager at Zynga, the
importance of looking at viability through a business lens can’t be stressed
enough. For many companies, it can be tempting to build the perfect viable
product simply because they have the resources to do so. By prioritizing viability,
Spotify ensures it won’t even waste time and money assigning an MVP team if
the overall idea isn’t profitable.
If, however, management verifies an idea is viable, a small “Think It” team con-
sisting of a developer, designer, and product manager is formed. At this point, the
team works on creating a product definition document so that a usable prototype
can be built. Using the document, they’ll seek to answer questions such as:
• Who will benefit from this and how?
• What are the key metrics that we expect this product to improve? (e.g. songs
streamed, number of downloads, etc.)
• What are the hypotheses?
• How will we know if this product is successful?
• Is this a “step change” (a product yielding at least a 2x improvement on the

93
chosen metric)? If only minor metrics improvements are expected, another
strong strategic reason should exist.
The goal here isn’t to outline features or technical requirements but to create a
data-focused value proposition. The heart of the product definition is narrative.
And the story told by the product is what the first iteration of the MVP will test.
Matchist.com cofounder, Stella Fayman, aptly states the goal of an MVP is to
prove that people will use your product. Landing pages and paid ads are a great
low-cost way to gauge interest because you test the basic value proposition first
(or narrative, in the case of Spotify) before sinking money into anything. This is
precisely what Spotify does. When developing its Mobile Free Radio (one version
being “Radio you can save”), Spotify ran a Google Adwords campaign to test nar-
ratives. In doing so, Spotify exemplifies applying minimalism towards an MVP.
Once the messaging is finalized through testing, the Think It team builds low-fi-
delity paper prototypes and high-fidelity runnable prototypes (with fake data).
Internal user testing provides feedback on which prototypes best convey the
narrative until the list is narrowed down to just a few contenders.
David Aycan, Design Director at the esteemed design and consultancy
firm IDEO, explains that multiple prototyping avoids tunnel vision. Ideating on
different user experiences puts your eggs in different baskets (preventing over-at-
tachment) and finds the best solution through real data instead of trying to pre-
dict what users want. Testing multiple prototypes lets Spotify find the most viable
MVP by focusing on breadth rather than depth.

94
Source: Using Minimum Viable Products
In UXPin, we can turn wireframes into prototypes rather quickly in our web app. We
take a similar iterative approach to Spotify by starting out with several lightweight,
even low-fidelity, prototypes and narrowing down the options from there. However, we
like to involve a small subset of friends and customers in the prototype testing (unlike
Spotify which just keeps it internal) since they help us “think outside the building.”
Ultimately this keeps our team centered on a good customer solution instead of just a
technical marvel.
Spotify, on the other hand, will only move forward if it can match the right pro-
totype to the narrative. Because it only involves prototyping and experimenting,
the Think It stage is the essence of MVP thinking — the team fails quickly and
cheaply, and keeps learning until they find the exact product to build.
II. BUILD IT
Now that a product is decided, the team moves beyond testing concepts to cre-

95
ating a physical MVP that is good enough to release to external users and test
assumptions.
The right balance of minimalism and quality must be struck with the physical
MVP. Building a feature-complete product requires too much time and money,
but rushing a feature-poor product out the door would embarrass Spotify and
yield no useful learnings. As such, the team must create the smallest possible
thing of quality that still fulfills the narrative and delights users.
As Former Apple chief evangelist, Guy Kawasaki, asserts in his MVP philos-
ophy, the physical MVP doesn’t need to be perfect but it must be revolutionary.
Early adopters are incredible force multipliers when it comes to early-stage prod-
ucts, and the only way to gain their influence is to create an MVP that embodies
five important qualities — it must be:
1. Deep — Great products have just the right level of functionality and don’t
become useless after just a few weeks.
2. Intelligent — Great products map specific solutions to pain points (and make
customers aware of problems they didn’t even know they had).
3. Complete — Great products are completely usable, even in early stages.

96
4. Empowering — Great products incite users to action and encourages them to
spread the news to help others.
5. Elegant — Great products have intuitive user interfaces and work the way
people think they should.
You’ll see in the above diagram that the key question Spotify’s product and man-
agement team asks is “Is the MVP good enough for real users?” By making its
MVP narrative-complete and not feature-complete, Spotify is able to inherently
satisfy all five qualities for a desirable and usable MVP. Perhaps, a better term
for Spotify’s MVP would be MLP (Minimum Loveable Product).
The Cupcake Model, which was first coined by Brandon Schauer, CEO of Adap-
tive Path, emphasizes desirability and completeness regardless of iteration.
The analogy states that instead of starting with an uninteresting cake and then
adding filling and icing, you start with a cupcake and iterate it into a cake. That
way, you invest less resources and the MVP is desirable — people will pay for a
cupcake because it’s complete with filling and icing. On the other hand, a dry
cake requires more resources to create and is unlikely to be good enough for real
users. By following a Cupcake Model, Spotify more importantly avoids mislead-
ing conclusions: “Well, we baked a plain cake and nobody wanted it, so the cake
failed and we shouldn’t bother adding frosting or filling.”
Source: The Value in a Cupcake

97
III. SHIP IT
The purpose of the Ship It stage is to gradually roll out the product to all users
while measuring and ensuring that the product fulfills its promise in the real
market.
Spotify starts by releasing to a small percentage of all users (usually 1-5%) to col-
lect early feedback. During this stage, the hypotheses that were internally tested
during the Think It stage are now externally validated.
As you’ll see in the above illustration, the beauty of this stage is that Spotify
doesn’t need to get it right on the first try. Collecting data, iterating the MVP, and
then A/B testing the changes allows for continuous rounds of maximized learn-
ing at minimized cost. Releasing an MVP early and to a small user base allows
Spotify to iterate until it becomes an EVP (Exceptional Viable Product) that is
ready for all users.
First coined by Rand Fishkin, co-founder of Moz, the EVP prevents companies
from prematurely releasing an MVP that just isn’t ready to excite early adopters.
Spotify understands that first impressions matter a lot, so it takes a cautious

98
approach of having a limited release of something good before making it great
and unleashing their brilliance. Based on the below diagram, Spotify releases its
MVP somewhere between “Good” and “Truly Impressive” and then uses customer
feedback to improve it into an EVP.
When management and the product team agree that the product is having the
intended impact on the small user group (based on the product definition), Spot-
ify will gradually roll it out to all users, while still measuring and improving.
IV. TWEAK IT
At Spotify, this stage is the longest, and perhaps most important. Unless products
get scrapped during the previous MVP stages, they spend most of their life in this
completely iterative phase.

99
While they may have proven themselves to a certain extent in the Ship It stage,
Spotify’s products are never considered feature-complete. The team continues
the Ship It process of gathering customer feedback, experimenting, and A/B test-
ing to improve the product, resulting in either major rework or just minor tweaks.
But, at some point soon, they may reach a point of diminishing returns when the
cost versus benefits of new features just looks less and less attractive.
As demonstrated in this article on value vs. complexity, this is an important
crossroad where feature prioritization is required. While Spotify believes that no
product is truly complete, it also understands the danger of feature creep. Once a
product hits its “local maximum” where small tweaks won’t really improve things,
Spotify’s product team and management evaluates if being at the top of the hill is
sufficient, or if a higher peak is in sight. If the effort isn’t worth the time, the team
will move on to other products. Otherwise, the product returns to the “Think It”
stage so it can be reworked and leap to the next peak of quality. Spotify’s Tweak
It stage ensures that it does not fall victim to the idea that first to market will
always stay king of the hill.

100
Gerard J. Tellis, a professor at USC Business School, believes that product
quality has become so important in recent years that network effects alone will
no longer protect companies who are first-to-market. In fact, network effects
actually reinforces competition for quality by driving customers to superior prod-
ucts. According to Tellis, the average duration for market leadership in the soft-
ware industry was only about 3.8 years. When you consider that Spotify is slowly
inching towards iTune’s market share as of 2014, Spotify’s evolutionary product
strategy is definitely working.
MORE PRODUCT STAGES = LESS COST, LESS RISK
For many companies, one of the most dangerous mistakes is building the wrong
product. They sink enormous cost into ideas that they think customers want and
then speed down the path of no return.
As you’ve seen, Spotify’s 4-stage product cycle helps them carefully find the right
product early and build it quickly and sufficiently. The length of each stage may
differ, but the constant balance between minimizing resources and maximizing

101
product quality is consistent.
“Don’t be afraid to fail fast and quickly — as long as you keep testing,
your most profitable idea might just come from what you learn.”
Ultimately, it leads to a lower cost, lower risk, higher quality product. We hope
Spotify’s strategy has helped you better understand the roles that Lean, Agile,
and MVP thinking play towards streamlining your own product development.
Don’t be afraid to fail fast and quickly — as long as you keep testing, your most
profitable idea might just come from what you learn.
Share
Quote

102
CHAPTER EIGHT
4REASONSMINIMUM
VIABLEPRODUCTSFAIL
Avoid the pitfalls to learn more, provide maximum value, and scale
Share this ebook
with friends!

103
It is common belief that roughly 80-90% of products fail. Although this figure
defies logic, the myth persists.
If over 80% of new products truly fail, does it make sense for anyone to take
a professional career risk by committing their time and talents to building new
products? From a portfolio perspective, what must the ROI of the remaining
10-20% of successful products be to offset the costs of a development program
that fails at that rate? Operationally, how long would it take to realize these
returns and what manager would realistically employ time, talent and money on
these new product projects?
Luckily, in reality, the failure rate is 30-49% across all industries, roughly 39-42%
in software & services and technology industries, respectively, according to nine-
teen peer-reviewed research studies between 1945 and 2004 (sources 1 & 2).
Although the rate of failure is dramatically lower than what is rumored, the many
risks of product failure cannot be understated.
Below, I talk about the many ways products can fail, how to tackle those risks sys-
tematically, and how UXPin has done so over the years.

104
SYSTEMATICALLY TACKLING 3 TYPES OF RISK
Ash Maurya, CEO of Cloudfire and author of Running Lean - Helping Entre-
preneurs Succeed, offers a lot of advice about products, especially MVPs. He’s
covered topics such as how to build an MVP, delivering customer value, product
launches and identifying the riskiest assumptions. On the last topic, he claims
there are three general approaches product leaders can take:
1. Use your intuition
2. Start with the 3 universal risks — I’ve detailed 4
3. Talk to domain experts
Ultimately, you alone have to own your business model and product roadmap so
having a systematic approach to evaluating them throughout the business and
product lifecycle is imperative. Since the first and last approaches are arguably
more risky — especially at the earlier stages of a product — I’ll only elaborate on
the second approach using the Lean Canvas framework below for nailing your
product or MVP.
In his post about 10x Product Launches, Maurya describes in detail how to
address the 3 universal risks and I’ve summarized them below. This focused and
systematic thinking about product risks was influenced by the management
philosophy Theory of Constraints (TOC). Adopting the common idiom “a chain
is no stronger than its weakest link,” this management paradigm assumes that
processes, organizations, etc. are vulnerable because the weakest person or part
can always damage or break them or at least adversely affect the outcome. As a
result, managers put this philosophy in practice by focusing on a very small num-
ber of constraints that could limit their business or product “system” and restruc-
turing those systems around the constraints to achieve more goals.

105
I’ve summarized the steps below:
1. Identify the system’s constraint(s)
2. Exploit the system’s constraint(s)
3. Subordinate all other resources to the constraint
4. Elevate the system’s constraint(s)
5. Rinse and repeat
PRODUCT RISK – GETTING THE PRODUCT RIGHT

106
• First make sure you have a problem worth solving.
• Then define the smallest possible solution (MVP).
• Build and validate your MVP at small scale (demonstrate UVP).
• Then verify it at large scale.
CUSTOMER RISK – BUILDING A PATH TO CUSTOMERS
• First identify who has the pain.
• Then narrow down to early adopters who really want your product now.
• It’s okay to start with outbound channels.
• But gradually build/develop scalable inbound channels – the earlier the better.
MARKET RISK – BUILDING A VIABLE BUSINESS
• Identify competition through existing alternatives and pick a price for your
solution.
• Test pricing first by measuring what customers say (verbal commitments).
• Then by what they do.
• Optimize your cost structure to make the business model work.
HOW TEAMS FAIL TO ADDRESS THESE RISKS
An MVP can fail for myriad reasons. Some of these failings have been highlighted
in the Forbes’ article, 8 Reasons Startups With Good Ideas Fail, but we’ve got in

107
far greater depth below.
PRODUCT FAILURE
Source: LeanBlog
• Solving the wrong problem — Overlooking the purpose of the product
before building, or simply focusing on the wrong purpose. You’ll either end
up with a product nobody cares about or one that doesn’t give you the right
answers.
• Solving the worthless problem — Worse than having the wrong product
that can be tweaked (or pivoted) to solve the right problem is solving a prob-
lem correctly, but it’s so minor in people’s everyday life that it ultimately can’t
be sustained.
• Poor customer communication — You can’t solve someone’s problems cor-

108
rectly if you can’t ask them the right questions.
• Not translating customer problems into correct product requirements
— You understand the problem that needs to be solved but end up building
the wrong solution.
• Not iterating on solutions — You understand the problem being solved and
have a great idea for how to build a solution, but you don’t consider alterna-
tives that could be far better and would give you better answers to the ques-
tions you’re trying to solve. Lack of brainstorming, customer engagement,
sketching, and wireframing and/or rapidly prototyping could hurt you.
• Overbuilding — You figure out the right solution but add too many features
that clutter the valuable functionality, leading to customer abandonment or
confusion which will also impact the quality of your learnings because the
user feedback and data is so scattered it doesn’t make sense.
• Launching late — Again, you know the solution but then spend too much
time building before launching your product. You either become disconnected
from the customers you’re trying to satisfy or run out of time, money and
resources.
• Lacking data — You’re not tracking or, worse, you’re improperly tracking user
behavior so you can’t properly make informed decisions and ultimately (in)
validate your hypotheses about the MVP. You just move onto the next product
release with only one eye open.
• Lacking scale — If you don’t get enough data points, your hypotheses about
what you’re building is harder to (in)validate. This is more important the big-
ger or more sophisticated your product becomes because it’s harder to get
signal from all of the noise for the growing number of questions you have
about the product.

109
CUSTOMER FAILURE
Source: “What is Customer Development?”
• Solving one’s own needs, not customers — It’s one thing if you built a
product that solves your problems and it’s another if the product only solves
your problems. You need to socialize your product with others to find who
actually needs your product. Then figure out where you can find more of
them.
• Building for too broad of an audience — You can’t be all things to all peo-
ple. You end up being a “Jack of all trades, master of none.” The results of this
are twofold: You’ll have a product that solves more people’s problems to a
lesser degree but you’ll also have a harder time figuring out who to go after
first. After all, it takes time, money and energy to get anyone to become your
customer, and the task is even more daunting when you’re trying to make the
entire World your customer.

110
• Not finding early adopters — Focusing on the wrong early customers can
be just as bad as not having focus. If your first customers are people who
aren’t in love with your product, then your product either sucks or you haven’t
found the early adopters yet. Think about it. You’re solving a problem that led
you to put every day of your life into building a product. You want people that
would use your product every day of their life — or close to it.
• No plan for marketing and user acquisition — You have early adopters
who love your product but no real way to get your product to market. Your
great product will die a slow death from neglect.
• Pushing to customers, not pulling them — You can only scale so much by
cold calling and emailing people. Even if your product is successful early on,
you’ll need to find better ways to get inbound interest.
MARKET FAILURE
Source: Wikipedia

111
• Not considering alternative solutions — You understand the problem
being solved and have a great idea for how to build a solution, but you do it
in a vacuum. Consider that customers have the power of choice and that you
have to compete for their business. If it’s a big problem, you’re not the only
one trying to solve it.
• Not charging — It’s hard to get a sense of what your product is worth to
customers if you don’t charge (or at least ask them verbally early on). It’s also
impossible to sustain your product if you don’t make money. While ad-based
businesses often start out free or freemium, they still have a path to revenue.
You should too.
• Not pricing correctly — Charging improperly can be as problematic as not
charging at all. You could have a false sense of what your product is worth
and not catch this for a long time. And it’s always changing based on the next
best alternative, customer behaviors and many more factors. Don’t just throw
discounts at customers to get them in the door. Try to really understand what
your customers will pay. This could also lead to failure for many reasons.
• Not tying pricing to customer value — Along the same lines, your product
typically provides different value to different customers for different reasons
based on specific functionality you’ve built. Your product doesn’t offer a stand-
ard utility to everyone. Therefore, it’s important to really understand how spe-
cific aspects of your product can be segmented to get the most revenue and
deliver the greatest customer value.
• Not adapting the business model to be profitable — You may have to
find a new customer or a new way of getting money from your existing cus-
tomers even if the product is serving a really important need.
• Not adapting the product to be profitable — Some parts of your product
may make it really expensive to operate, may cause a lot of customer service

112
maintenance, etc. Your product can impact your ability to sustain itself. It’s not
just the business that could be wrong.
TEAM FAILURE
Source: thezooom.com
While Maurya doesn’t include this in his framework, the human factor in prod-
uct failure is critical to consider. Forbes’ article, 8 Reasons Startups With Good
Ideas Fail, is a good starting point. I’ve laid out some of the main points of failure
below:
• Not taking action — Ideas and direction are worthless if nobody can deliver
on them. Don’t get too far ahead of yourself with your ideas (and idealism).
You’ll spin your wheels and spend your resources without getting anything
tangible done. Or someone else will come in and take your spoils because you
were too busy brainstorming release 10 when you haven’t finished v.1.
• Giving up — You just stop, call it quits, throw in the towel. You give up. Build-
ing an amazing product and business is hard. Don’t feel bad if it happens. Just

113
recognize that it happened and don’t make excuses.
• Lack of expertise — Collecting data and talking with customers is great. But
if you don’t know how to interpret the feedback, you’ll be blind. And the blind
leading the blind may drive you off a cliff.
• Disagreement about goals and/or direction — If you don’t have a clear
objective for your MVP across the team, then your methodology and, there-
fore, conclusions may be compromised.
STAY FOCUSED OR YOUR MVP WILL SUX
Any of the above MVP failures (or a combination thereof) will produce a product
that SUX — an offering with a “Sh***y User Experience.”
At UXPin, we try to address all of these potential failing points. Like many com-
panies, we’ve certainly been guilty of building features that weren’t the most
important to our customers or, ultimately, company growth. However, we’ve been
aware of and addressed many of the potential failure points mentioned and the
results have been incredible. While I can’t give you exact numbers, you can at
least see that we’re driving significant changes in one of several key metrics over
the past few months and are on track to blow that number away as well. We’re
clearly doing something right.
Source: UXPin

114
CHAPTER EIGHT
10MASSIVELYSUCCESSFUL
MINIMUMVIABLEPRODUCTS
Hot products that have mastered the MVP since the beginning
Share this ebook
with friends!

115
Today, lean startups and tech titans alike are increasingly using the minimum via-
ble product (MVP) as a starting point for building successful software products. A
successful minimum viable product helps you start the learning process as soon
as possible, and not just to answer the technical questions of “how” but also to
eliminate the business uncertainty of “why.”
Now let’s take a look at some of the companies that got their MVP right and what
they did to go on and launch some of the hottest products in the market today.
1. DROPBOX
In his book The Lean Startup, Eric Ries, cofounder/CTO of IMVU talks about
how Dropbox tackled the question of market viability by demonstrating their
product in a video.
To answer the question of whether customers would want to use and pay for
their file-sync solution and to justify the market to investors, Houston and his
team had to “get out of the building” and put their proposed user experience in
front of actual users to get feedback. Instead of digging into servers and building
a high-availability, low-latency, always-on network even before they had any clue
people would use it, the team decided to try something else.

116
Source: Dropbox
They made an explainer video and started sharing it with their network to see
how people would react. The 3-minute video demonstrated Dropbox’s intended
functionality and resulted in signups increasing from 5,000 people to 75,000
overnight — all of this in absence of a real product.
Dropbox’s explainer video served as a brilliant validation of the market before
the founders ever had to invest in the infrastructure and development needed
for a high-tech product like theirs to reach a functional level in the real world.
It walked potential customers through what the product is and clearly demon-
strated how it would help them, eventually leading to why they would want to
pay you for it.
When it comes to product development, it’s easier said than done but when
you’re building an MVPs, that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

117
2. AIRBNB
In 2007, Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia wanted to start a business, but also
couldn’t afford the rent of their San Francisco apartment. There was a design con-
ference coming to town, and they decided to open up their loft as cheap accom-
modation for conference attendees who had lucked out on the hotels nearby.
They took pictures of their apartment, put it up on a simple website, and soon
they had 3 paying guests for the duration of the conference: a woman from Bos-
ton, a father from Utah, and another man originally from India.
Source: AirBed And Breakfast Takes Pad Crashing To A Whole New Level
The up-close interaction gave Chesky and Gebbia valuable insight into what
potential customers would want. This concierge MVP helped validate the mar-
ket and prove people would be willing to buy the experience. With their initial
assumptions answered that not just recent college grads would be willing to pay
to stay in someone else’s home rather than a hotel, they started Airbnb (then
called AirBedAndBreakfast).

118
3. GROUPON
Andrew Mason started with a website called The Point, a platform to bring people
together to accomplish things they couldn’t do alone, like fundraising or boycott-
ing a retailer. But the site wasn’t gaining much momentum, so they decided to try
out something else.
Source: The Point
Using the same domain, they set up a customized WordPress blog called
The Daily Groupon and began posting deals each day manually. When someone
signed up for a particular deal, the team would generate a PDF document and

119
email it using Apple Mail. This simple website they “cobbled together” showed
the team this was a market worth looking at with just a manual-first (“Wizard
of Oz”) MVP that helped them pivot their offering from what they had been
doing previously.
They didn’t invest any time into developing a coupon system and designing a
new website. Instead, they took what resources they had and made a piecemeal
MVP out of them to test the hypothesis of whether people would be interested
in what they were offering. Starting from a customized WordPress website and
manually emailing PDF documents to a mailing list isn’t exactly what you’d call
scaleable, but Groupon’s MVP was successful in answering that question for
them.
4. BUFFER
Buffer is a simple app that lets you schedule your posts across your social net-
work, essentially letting you space out your updates so that you don’t flood
your friends’ newsfeeds at one point in the day with interesting stuff you want
to share. When starting out, Joel Gascoigne, Buffer’s founder, didn’t want to get
stuck building a product no one wanted to use. So he began with a simple test.

120
Source:: Idea to Paying Customers in 7 Weeks- How We Did It
Buffer’s first minimum viable product was just a simple landing page. It
explained what Buffer was and how it would work, encouraged people to sign
up and offered a plans and pricing button for people to click on if they were
interested. When they did, however, they were shown a short message explain-
ing they weren’t quite ready yet and that people should sign up for updates. Joel
used the email addresses received from the signup form to start conversations
with the potential users of the app, gaining valuable feedback and insight into
what they would want.
Next, they tested the hypothesis that people would want to pay for this by add-

121
ing the prices table in between the landing page and the signup form. When
someone clicked on the pricing plans button, they were shown the plans to
see whether they would be interested in paying for something like Buffer. This
showed Joel how many of the visitors to the site could potentially become paying
customers. This zero-risk MVP helped Buffer identify the market and shape their
product features in the coming development as well.
5. ZAPPOS
Today, we know that people are comfortable with buying shoes online when Zap-
pos had annual sales of more than $1 billion and was acquired by Amazon for $1.2
billion in 2009. But in 1999, when co-founder Nick Swinmurn wanted to build
an online retail store that stocked a great selection of shoes, the assumption that
other people would use it needed to be tested.

122
Source: Zappos
Swinmurn began by putting up photos of shoes from local shoe stores on a
website to gauge demand for an online store. When someone ordered the shoe
online, he would return to the store and buy it. Instead of first investing in infra-
structure and inventory, this gave Zappos a chance to answer the question of
whether their product would be accepted by the market. This Wizard of Oz,
man-behind-the-curtain technique is used to test market hypotheses. It comes
from the idea of putting on the impression of full functionality, essentially faking
it until you make it. Customers believe they are experiencing the actual product,
but in reality the work behind the scenes is being done manually. In the case of
Zappos, by Swinmurn.

123
The Wizard of Oz approach is great because it also allows for greater interac-
tion with customers at this crucial stage when you’re designing the product. The
expedited learning, albeit at a small-scale, provides opportunities to test many
assumptions you might be making about the product or the marketplace.
6. TWITTER
Twitter traces its origins to the podcasting platform Odeo. When Odeo found the
ground underneath slipping away after Apple stepped into the podcasting game
with iTunes, the company started running hackathons to come up with ideas of
where to head next. One result of this was an idea for sharing updates with a
group of people via text messages, codenamed “twttr”.
Source: Famous First Landing Pages
The first prototype was used as an internal service for Odeo employees, who

124
eventually became so obsessed with it that they began racking up “monthly SMS
bills totaling hundreds of dollars”. This gave the team the push they needed to
release Twitter to the public, but it was only at the SXSW festival in 2007 that
their user base exploded when they showed off members’ tweets about the event
on TV screens across the venue.
7. ZYNGA
Zynga is a game studio that builds social games, popularized by the likes of Farm-
ville, which surpassed $1 billion in revenue from in-game purchases in 2013. For
their game development process, the company follows a mix of landing pages
and Adwords MVP tests to gauge interest in a planned game or particular
aspect of the game.
Source: Zynga Rewardville
By running short ads in existing games and online that pitch potential game ideas
and features, the company is able to gather data about which direction to steer
development towards, preventing them from wasting any resources on building a

125
game that people don’t end up playing.
8. FOURSQUARE
Foursquare is a location-based social network that lets users check-in with
their location to share with friends and family. After their first such network,
SMS-based Dodgeball, was acquired by Google, founders Dennis Crowley and
Naveen Selvadurai set out to work on a mobile app based network they called
Foursquare.
Source: Foursquare scores despite its flaws
Backed by VC funding, they didn’t let development time slow them down, how-
ever, and launched with a single-featured MVP that didn’t bog them down in

126
design and unnecessary features. They began with check-ins and the gamification
rewards and focused on improving that side of the user experience, using feed-
back to mold their product.
Once they were comfortable with the basic functionality, they began adding extra
features like Recommendations and City Guides years later. Additionally, they
used existing services to help manage the service, for example using Google
Docs to gather feedback and requests from users, which goes to show that you
don’t need to do everything yourself when you start in order to build a scalable
business.
9. SPOTIFY
According to Henrik Kniberg, Agile and Lean Startup consultant and
author, Spotify uses a 4-stage iterative product cycle (Think It, Build It, Ship It,
Tweak It). When they launched in 2009 with a landing page, they focused on
the single feature that mattered most: music streaming experience. With the
desktop apps, they were able to test the market in the limited beta run, giving
them time to build momentum to tackle the music industry licensing concerns
that were sure to come as they planned on expanding to the US.

127
Source: Spotify set to take America by storm
They follow the same Agile process today to help scale. Each one of Spotify’s four
stages are Lean since small teams are always working smartly to test assump-
tions. The “Think It” stage tests the merit of conceptual MVPs while the “Build
It” stage releases a physical MVP only after it’s been tested for quality. The “Ship
It” and “Tweak It” phases ensure long-term quality and customer alignment by
releasing the MVP gradually, learning from feedback, and iterating tirelessly.
10. PEBBLE
Pebble is an e-paper smartwatch, arguably the one that brought the “wearables”
market to the mainstream today. After investor funding dried up, founder Eric

128
Migicovsky turned to crowdfunding site Kickstarter for fundraising and ended
up becoming the most successful project there, raising more than $10 million
from interested customers looking to support development.
Source:Pebble, E-Paper Watch for iPhone and Android
Migicovsky recorded an explainer video to demonstrate the prototype and
asked interested customers to contribute. They reached the original goal of
$100,000 in 2 hours and by the end of the week had raised $600,000. When
the funding round on Kickstarter ended, more than 60,000 people had pledged
$10.2 million to the project and Pebble went on to develop the watch for consum-
ers. As of March 20, 2014, Pebble has sold over 400,000 units.
TESTING THE RISKIEST ASSUMPTIONS
In his book, The Lean Startup, Eric Ries writes about how to choose what to test

129
when designing an MVP:
“When one is choosing among the many assumptions in a business plan, it
makes sense to test the riskiest assumptions first. If you can’t find a way to miti-
gate these risks toward the ideal that is required for a sustainable business, there
is no point in testing the others.”
For most startups, the riskiest assumption is the existence of the market. For
Dropbox, that assumption was that people wanted to use a file synchronization
service. For Zappos, it was that people would buy shoes online. For Airbnb, it was
that they would be willing to live at a stranger’s house as opposed to in a hotel.
And in each of these cases, they designed their MVP to answer the important
questions on which their businesses rested.
As you’ve seen, the minimum viable product is more a way of thinking than
something that’s just released to the market. The principles are the same whether
you’re a Fortune 500 company headed for your next breakthrough or a one-man
shop on the verge of putting an “Aha!” moment into action. Don’t dive into the
deep end with all your resources strapped around your waist. Research thor-
oughly, build features moderately, and keep the team focused by working in
small batches. Above all else, test, tweak, and test some more.
“The MVP is more than just a product, it’s a way of thinking.”
I’ve done enough talking. And you have ideas to validate (or invalidate). Now go
forward and use what you’ve learned to test and refine your vision.
Share
Quote

130
www.uxpin.com
Complete prototyping framework
for web, mobile and wearables
Collaboration and feedback for any team size
Lo-fi to hi-fi design in a single tool

Uxpin guide to_mvps

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Uxpin guide to_mvps (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Uxpin guide to_mvps