May 1, 2025

Shooting Holes in the Minimum Viable Product

By: Michael Tanner

(Originally posted 4/22/2016). A really great idea can sometimes go viral and become “a thing” quickly—as in “is that really a thing?” The problem is, once a concept becomes “a thing,” it often gets watered down, generalized, hi-jacked, or otherwise misused. I believea prime example this is the concept of minimum viable product (MVP), as popularized by Eric Ries in his 2011 book “The Lean Startup.” By 2014, it was even discussed in the first episode of the sitcom Silicon Valley. The idea is simple: release a product with just enough features to deploy it and learn from real customers as you continue product development.

In theory, MVPs help teams move fast, minimize feature creep, stick to schedules, and align with Agile development. Driving to an MVP signals capital efficiency, and startups also appreciate the MVP concept because it allows them to test marketing strategies early on in parallel with product performance.

Sounds perfect, right? Not always. Here’s where MVPs often go off the rails:

  1. Early adopter feedback can mislead. In B2B markets, early adopters don’t always reflect the broader customer base. They may evaluate products differently—ornot buy at all. Designing features solely for these early adopters can take youdown the wrong path.
  2. Minimizing feature creep is tricky. Human nature being what it is, “minimum viable” can quickly be confused with “minimum possible,” cutting out features that are actually essential to customer adoption.
  3. Release schedules vs. real viability. Teams often justify deadlines by trimming features, but that doesn’t mean the product is truly viable. MVPs should inform schedules, not constrain them.
  4. Go-to-market confusion. In B2B, “minimum viable” rarely matches the needs of typical buyers. Launching an MVP commercially without tightly controlled channels or beta programs frustrate sales teams and customers alike
  5. Agile + MVP ≠guaranteed success. Agile is most effective when product criticality is low. Launching disruptive B2B products into complex markets doesn’t usually fit that bill. If teams rely on MVP + Agile the additional direct sales costs from wasted effort can be enormous, not to mention the cultural impact that comes from an inability to close deals.
  6. Growth-hacking limitations. MVP-driven marketing experiments can mislead if trials and analytics aren’t compared against actual paying customers. Insights can validate behaviors that don’t actually drive revenue.

I say all this not to bash the MVP—I’m actually a huge fan. Ries’ Lean Startup is brilliant. But the concept can be stretched to justify not taking enough time to understand what true "viability" is.  That’s a screen-play that seems to repeat.  Used thoughtfully, MVPs are powerful. Used as justification, they can waste time, money, and focus. The trick is context: ensure the MVP truly serves your customers, not just your schedules, investors, or internal excitement.