Excellent video Nick - I've left comments on your LinkedIn about the topic of MVPs, but I wanted to say how great this video is - every part of it is important, well considered and gives more value. Always learning from you bro!
Really enjoyed reading your comment on LinkedIn and this one too. Thank you bro! I'm so pleased you noticed the attention to detail that went into making it 🥰
Hi Nick, first of all, you should wrote disclaimer: Do not not try this at home (before shaving)😂. Seriously, I like: "simply saying we're doing experiments". Yet, I think that main confusion stems from separating MVP from prototypes- which (prototypes) are anyway on the list of 44 business experiments. There are slightly different versions of what Eric Ries said and wrote, and when I asked Dr. Osterwalder for clarification, he responded that prototyping comes much earlier, and that MVP follows much later in innovation process, bringing me to conclusion that MVP is what it's saying: minimum VIABLE product. With MVP we're testing for viability/ profitability of products/ value proposition and business models , versus only for some features (like with prototyping). And that is the point which adds even more to misunderstanding, because it is hard to test/ isolate only for product viability, rather we've been testing all "elements" of BM (canvas) how they work together; whether the whole combo is viable; I mean mix of VP, CRM, channels, resources/ capabilities/ people/ technology, culture, partners/ activities, prices, volume/ scale, costs (breakeven), ROI. In effect it's about de-risking before funding and investing in all elements of BM, or in operations& scaling 4 exploit stage. Shouldn't we replace MVP with MVBM?
hahaha I agree 😆 I want it! Metrics are definitely important. They're in the Test Card which includes: 1. Hypothesis: We believe that... 2. Test: To verify that we will... 3. Metric: And measure... 4. Criteria: We are right if...
Thank you for the video, it´s good food for thought... I agree we should not speak more about MVP as "Minimum Viable Product"... We should instead speak about "Minimum VALUABLE Product" ... I like that more than "business experiments" (and we keep the MVP acronym jaja!!)
I'm really glad you got some value from the video Francois! I agree it's going to be a long journey to make the change. But the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. I believe we can do it. Imagine a world where all companies understand the power and the process of running business experiments. 🤩🤗
Thank you Nick for reminding me of the learning step! Measuring happens almost automatic with audience building but taking lessons from it actually takes effort to sit down and interpret this data.
That is an interesting perspective. I believe it depends on the audience. As a consumer, I'm more likely to purchase an MVP than a Business Experiment. There's a stronger belief in the MVP's potential to be fully developed, even though, essentially, they are the same thing.
I think we're on the same page Ivan. Before you build the MVP you do some basic desirability tests like customer interviews etc. Then once you have some evidence to suggest you should build a single feature MVP, you go ahead and do that. But it doesn't make sense to immediately build an MVP from the start. Tesla is a good example of a company that did different experiments before building anything.
Let me know what you think.
Should we stop saying MVP?
Excellent video Nick - I've left comments on your LinkedIn about the topic of MVPs, but I wanted to say how great this video is - every part of it is important, well considered and gives more value. Always learning from you bro!
Really enjoyed reading your comment on LinkedIn and this one too. Thank you bro!
I'm so pleased you noticed the attention to detail that went into making it 🥰
Hi Nick, first of all, you should wrote disclaimer: Do not not try this at home (before shaving)😂. Seriously, I like: "simply saying we're doing experiments". Yet, I think that main confusion stems from separating MVP from prototypes- which (prototypes) are anyway on the list of 44 business experiments. There are slightly different versions of what Eric Ries said and wrote, and when I asked Dr. Osterwalder for clarification, he responded that prototyping comes much earlier, and that MVP follows much later in innovation process, bringing me to conclusion that MVP is what it's saying: minimum VIABLE product. With MVP we're testing for viability/ profitability of products/ value proposition and business models , versus only for some features (like with prototyping). And that is the point which adds even more to misunderstanding, because it is hard to test/ isolate only for product viability, rather we've been testing all "elements" of BM (canvas) how they work together; whether the whole combo is viable; I mean mix of VP, CRM, channels, resources/ capabilities/ people/ technology, culture, partners/ activities, prices, volume/ scale, costs (breakeven), ROI. In effect it's about de-risking before funding and investing in all elements of BM, or in operations& scaling 4 exploit stage. Shouldn't we replace MVP with MVBM?
We’re completely aligned Bogdan!
I like the concept of the MVBM but maybe we can find a better name? 😊🙏
Build, measure and learn -this could make a great tattoo! Adding a metric to your test is a great way to measure the success of your build.
hahaha I agree 😆
I want it!
Metrics are definitely important.
They're in the Test Card which includes:
1. Hypothesis: We believe that...
2. Test: To verify that we will...
3. Metric: And measure...
4. Criteria: We are right if...
Superb storytelling. Yep, done the build-build-build plenty of times, with modest testing. Should have learned.
I'm a recovering build-build-builder too David! 😁
Thank you! I'm really glad you enjoyed it.
Thank you for the video, it´s good food for thought... I agree we should not speak more about MVP as "Minimum Viable Product"... We should instead speak about "Minimum VALUABLE Product" ... I like that more than "business experiments" (and we keep the MVP acronym jaja!!)
Great video! I never thought about it but males so much sense. Although I see that the term MVP is going to be hard to be removed for many innovators.
I'm really glad you got some value from the video Francois!
I agree it's going to be a long journey to make the change.
But the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
I believe we can do it.
Imagine a world where all companies understand the power and the process of running business experiments. 🤩🤗
Absolute legend. Thank you for the education 🙌🏾🙌🏾
You're welcome Ayo. I'm really glad it was well received. 🤗
Thank you Nick for reminding me of the learning step!
Measuring happens almost automatic with audience building but taking lessons from it actually takes effort to sit down and interpret this data.
I love how you took this and applied it to the creator context Valentin! 😁
Such a great way to use the Build Measure Learn Loop. 🙌
I love the videos from this Man!
Thank you so much Stein! 🙌
That is an interesting perspective. I believe it depends on the audience. As a consumer, I'm more likely to purchase an MVP than a Business Experiment. There's a stronger belief in the MVP's potential to be fully developed, even though, essentially, they are the same thing.
I think we're on the same page Ivan. Before you build the MVP you do some basic desirability tests like customer interviews etc.
Then once you have some evidence to suggest you should build a single feature MVP, you go ahead and do that.
But it doesn't make sense to immediately build an MVP from the start.
Tesla is a good example of a company that did different experiments before building anything.