The MVP Trap: When Minimum Viable Becomes Maximum Regret

The concept of MVP has been corrupted. What started as a discipline for learning has become an excuse for shipping garbage.

The concept of MVP has been corrupted. What started as a discipline for learning has become an excuse for shipping garbage. Let me explain why your MVP is probably not viable.

The Original Intent

Eric Ries introduced the MVP as a learning vehicle. The goal was not to build less—it was to learn faster. The M in MVP stands for Minimum learning, not Minimum effort.

An MVP is not the smallest thing you can build. It is the smallest thing that can validate your riskiest assumption.

The Viability Checklist

Before calling something an MVP, it must pass these gates:

Dimension	Question	Non-Negotiable
Value	Does it solve a real problem?	Yes
Usability	Can someone use it without hand-holding?	Yes
Reliability	Does it work when you are not watching?	Yes
Scope	Could it be even smaller?	Maybe

The Scope Reduction Framework

When scoping an MVP, I use this decision tree:

For each feature:
  1. Is this required to test the hypothesis?
     NO  -> Cut it
     YES -> Continue
  
  2. Can this be done manually first?
     YES -> Fake it (Wizard of Oz)
     NO  -> Build it
  
  3. Is there an existing tool that does this?
     YES -> Integrate it
     NO  -> Build minimal version

Real Examples

Dropbox: MVP was a video, not software
Zapier: MVP was manual integrations done by founders
Buffer: MVP was a landing page with pricing before any code

The Takeaway

Build the smallest thing that tests your biggest assumption. If you can learn without code, do not write code. If you can learn with a spreadsheet, use a spreadsheet. The goal is validated learning, not shipped features.