Startup - Your customers hate MVPs. Make a SLC instead.
“MVP” is a selfish process, abusing customers so you can “learn.” SLC is an alternate philosophy that results in fast, validated learning, that customers love.
Product teams have been repeating the MVP (Minimum Viable Product) mantra for a decade now, without re-evaluating whether it’s the right way to maximize learning while pleasing the customer.
Well, it’s not the best system. It’s selfish and it hurts customers.
The motivation behind the MVP is still valid:
- Build something small, because small things are quick and inexpensive to test.
- Get it into the market quickly, because real learning occurs only when real customers are using a real product.
- Trash it or hard-pivot if it’s a failure, or invest if it’s a seedling with potential.
The problem is: Customers hate MVPs.
Fortunately, there’s a better way to build and validate products.
In order for the product to be small and delivered quickly, it has to be simple. Customers accept simple products every day. Even if it doesn’t do everything needed, as long as the product never claimed to do more than it does, customers are forgiving. For example, it was okay that early versions Google Docs had only 3% of the features of Microsoft Word, because Docs did a great job at what it was primarily designed for, which is simplicity and real-time collaboration.
Google Docs was simple, but also complete. This is decidedly different from the classic MVP, which by definition isn’t complete (in fact, it’s “embarrassing”). “Simple” is good, “incomplete” is not. The customer should have a genuine desire to use the product, as-is. Not because it’s version 0.1 of something complex, but because it’s version 1.0 of something simple.
The final ingredient is that the product has to be lovable. People have to want to use it. Products that do less but are loved, are more successful than products which have more features, but that people dislike. The original, very-low-feature, very-highly-loved, hyper-successful early versions of all the products listed in the previous paragraph are examples. The Darwinian success loop of a product is a function of love, not of features.
From this reasoning, years ago I named what I believe is the correct alternative to the MVP: Simple, Lovable and Complete (SLC). We pronounce it “Slick.” As in: “What’s the ‘Slick’ version of your idea?”
Another benefit of SLC becomes apparent when you consider the next version of the product.
A SLC product does not require ongoing development in order to add value. It’s possible that v1 should evolve for years into a v4, but you also have the option of not investing further in the product, yet it still adds value. An MVP that never gets additional investment is just a bad product. A SLC that never gets additional investment is a good, if modest product.
A skateboard is a SLC product. It’s faster than walking, it’s simple, many people love it, and it’s a complete product that doesn’t need additions to be fun or practical. At the same time, you can evolve the skateboard by adding a stem and handlebars, to create a scooter—only slightly less simple, and definitely loveable and complete. Next, you could grow the wheels, add a seat and some gears, and you have a bike. Again, less simple but now you have a product with massive benefits of speed, distance, and energy-efficiency.
With SLC, the outcomes are better and your options for next steps are better. If it fails, that’s OK; it’s a failed experiment. Both SLCs and MVPs will sometimes produce that result because the whole point is to experiment. But if a SLC succeeds, you’ve already delivered real value to customers and you have multiple futures available to you, none of which are urgent. You could build a v2, and because you’re already generating value, you have more time to decide what that should look like. You could even query existing customers to determine exactly what v2 should entail, instead of a set of alpha-testers who just want to know “when are you going to fix this broken thing?”
Or, you can decide not to work on it. Not every product has to become complex. Not every product needs new major versions every two quarters. Some things can just remain simple, lovable, and complete.
Ask your customers. They’ll agree.
https://longform.asmartbear.com/slc/
No comments: