Comments on: How can I show a Minimum Viable Product and still look credible?

By: Cindy

Cindy — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:44:50 +0000

Robin: Yes, the other problem about having a prototype that looks extremely “designed” is that your customers will wonder why you can’t deliver a finished product next month! After all, it looked “done” to us!

For both of those concerns, I’ve found it useful to “brand” demos with a fake company name (i.e. Acme Corp) and logo. Then you can open up with “This is just a prototype for the fictional company Acme Corp” (or “for the fictional product Acme Product”).

This helps get users out of the mindset of nitpicking – doesn’t eliminate it entirely, but helps a lot.

By: Robin Zaragoza

Robin Zaragoza — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:51:35 +0000

Cindy, totally agree with having a clean prototype to do testing off of! Users get so off base when they see typos and lots of colors that may imply the final product. Haven’t used Balsamiq, but I like Protoshare a lot. And if you have the funds, Axure is great as well.

By: Paul Marshall

Paul Marshall — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:20:14 +0000

Well said, good post.
“Perfection is the Enemy of Good”

By: Hakan Kilic

Hakan Kilic — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:35:49 +0000

I couldn’t agree more with the “validate your minimalist idea with customers first”. I’ve seen great success when you’ve already done your homework on initial market feedback before you ever pitch your MVP to senior execs, because you’ll never get a 2nd meeting without a good dose of credibility. It almost begs to break most iterative product design cycles because you really need a “pre-cycle” stage that is usually unfunded and under the radar. I’d rather see companies officially fund such efforts with marketing or development money up front, because $50K spent up front for a $1M R&D project is money well spent, even to decide it’s not worth it in the end.

You’re first product pitch may be your last, so treat each one with as much polish as you can, even MVP’s