Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Through my ACP Journey, I learned that MVP (Minimal Viable Product), MMP (Minimal Marktable Product) & MMF (Minimal Marketable Feature) each serves a different purpose in agile projects.
What is your opinion and how does each provide business value ? Saving Changes...
Werner BeckmannProduct Owner| SIGNAL IDUNA GruppeDortmund, Germany
The main goal of the MVP should be to test your assumptions about the core value of your product. Therefore it must really be usable and valuable to real users - otherwise all their feedback is based on assumptions as well. The MVP might make you completely change the direction of the product development - fail fast and fail cheap! Leave away as much as you can and save that effort for later.
Many companies, however, seem to make the MVP too big: they're often frightened to let users try out a not-so-perfect product in fear of ruining their company's image.
Example for a MVP: As a company you integrate a simple ordering / claim / contact form into your website, allowing users to fill in details online rather than sending letters. For further processing you simply forward the contents per e-mail to somebody in the company.
After launching your MVP you would then observe how many requests are coming in. Based on the numbers you can then decide if it pays to integrate the form with a backend system, e.g. trouble ticketing.
...
2 replies by Rami Kaibni
Jul 19, 2019 3:44 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Interesting perspective Werner. Thanks for the great feedback.
I think there is a fine line between MMF and MVP and while MVP contains the main top high priority features that the product won't function properly without, I think where people go big is in the MMF. They try to inflate the Minimum Marketable Features and then they end up failing fast but not cheap.
Jul 19, 2019 3:44 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Interesting perspective Werner. Thanks for the great feedback.
I think there is a fine line between MMF and MVP and while MVP contains the main top high priority features that the product won't function properly without, I think where people go big is in the MMF. They try to inflate the Minimum Marketable Features and then they end up failing fast but not cheap.
I've seen organizations struggle with any term that has "minimum". As soon as you say that, they think "bare-bones". In a sense, they are right but try to explain how giving them only what is of the utmost value is a good thing.
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Jul 19, 2019 7:54 AM
Replying to Werner Beckmann
...
The main goal of the MVP should be to test your assumptions about the core value of your product. Therefore it must really be usable and valuable to real users - otherwise all their feedback is based on assumptions as well. The MVP might make you completely change the direction of the product development - fail fast and fail cheap! Leave away as much as you can and save that effort for later.
Many companies, however, seem to make the MVP too big: they're often frightened to let users try out a not-so-perfect product in fear of ruining their company's image.
Example for a MVP: As a company you integrate a simple ordering / claim / contact form into your website, allowing users to fill in details online rather than sending letters. For further processing you simply forward the contents per e-mail to somebody in the company.
After launching your MVP you would then observe how many requests are coming in. Based on the numbers you can then decide if it pays to integrate the form with a backend system, e.g. trouble ticketing.
Interesting perspective Werner. Thanks for the great feedback.
I think there is a fine line between MMF and MVP and while MVP contains the main top high priority features that the product won't function properly without, I think where people go big is in the MMF. They try to inflate the Minimum Marketable Features and then they end up failing fast but not cheap. Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Jul 19, 2019 7:54 AM
Replying to Werner Beckmann
...
The main goal of the MVP should be to test your assumptions about the core value of your product. Therefore it must really be usable and valuable to real users - otherwise all their feedback is based on assumptions as well. The MVP might make you completely change the direction of the product development - fail fast and fail cheap! Leave away as much as you can and save that effort for later.
Many companies, however, seem to make the MVP too big: they're often frightened to let users try out a not-so-perfect product in fear of ruining their company's image.
Example for a MVP: As a company you integrate a simple ordering / claim / contact form into your website, allowing users to fill in details online rather than sending letters. For further processing you simply forward the contents per e-mail to somebody in the company.
After launching your MVP you would then observe how many requests are coming in. Based on the numbers you can then decide if it pays to integrate the form with a backend system, e.g. trouble ticketing.
Interesting perspective Werner. Thanks for the great feedback.
I think there is a fine line between MMF and MVP and while MVP contains the main top high priority features that the product won't function properly without, I think where people go big is in the MMF. They try to inflate the Minimum Marketable Features and then they end up failing fast but not cheap. Saving Changes...
I've seen organizations struggle with any term that has "minimum". As soon as you say that, they think "bare-bones". In a sense, they are right but try to explain how giving them only what is of the utmost value is a good thing.
I agree, sometimes tis is challenging ! Saving Changes...
Community Champion
