Minimum viable experience

You’ve probably heard of the minimum viable product (MVP). Because the attitudes and norms of Silicon Valley have become the dominant corporate culture within the US and Canada, MVP has become the quality approach to new development.

We think that MVP doesn’t satisfy the requirements of most businesses and organizations. 

While you’ll launch faster and learn more via multiple iterations, MVP doesn’t do the work the customer wants it to. 

Today, we’re getting to present another approach to MVP — minimum viable experience, or MVE. We expect that MVE may be better thanks to taking new products and services to plug, and that we think it’d be the approach for you. 

Here we go!

MVP may be a framework for brooding about the way to take products to plug. Developed within the early 2000s and entering the mainstream mostly via the lean startup movement, it’s now the de facto  approach to shipping new products (especially software). 

The basic idea is that this.

As an entrepreneur, you’re never satisfied together with your product. You’ve got an enormous vision, and could be tempted to place off launching until your vision is ideal. 

The challenge is that this approach is extremely expensive, since it takes an extended time and there’s no money coming in, and risky, because you’re not getting early market feedback. 

A better approach is to figure out what the minimum requirements of your product are to urge it within the hands of consumers. You’ll find out the remainder of the things later. That’s the guts of MVP. 

For example, say you’re building a motorhome. You know that a minimum of it needs the essential components of a car (engine, wheels, etc… ), it must be roadworthy, and it needs an area for you to sleep and cook. Everything else is often sorted out later. 

So, your MVP, during this case, won’t be a motorhome in the least, but rather a van with a bed within the back. As you set your product into the market, you get feedback much faster than traditional development, which successively makes each iteration better and better. 

And eventually, you finish up with a product your customers love.


The Problem with MVP

Not beat well within the world of MVP though. While it’s possible to ship products quickly, there are a couple of common objections. 

Not everyone has an engaged user base

As Karl Smith put it in his blog: “An MVP requires an engaged customer base who are happy to possess limited features and capabilities provided there’s a transparent, responsive and rapid development process.” Not everyone has this. For instance, if you sell software to hospitals, you’ll probably need to look long and hard before you discover an early adopter. What’s more, you would possibly struggle to urge enough customers to form viable, data-driven decisions. 

MVPs usually have a poor brand experience

If you’re only focused on shipping product features, then brand and customer experience will (generally) leave the window. for a few products selling into some markets, this is often fine. As an example, consumer technology companies have a notoriously early adopter customer base, so launching something new immediately is usually better than launching something better, later. Again though, this isn’t true for each market.

MVP doesn’t consider the entire market

The market isn’t just composed of consumers. A 5C Analysis shows us that markets are made from (at least) yourself, collaborators / partners, customers, competitors, and socio-political-economic context. 

Basically, your product doesn’t exist during a vacuum. However, MVP assumes that you simply have pure greenfield to pursue, and there’s no auxiliary cost of making a poor first impression (for example, having someone drift to competitors, or offer you a nasty review online).

All in all, while MVP may be a great framework for shipping products quickly, it’s maybe not an excellent way for a corporation to plug in. 

Fortunately, there’s a far better way.


Enter the foremost Valuable Player – the MVE 

Minimum Viable Experience has an equivalent core ethos as MVP. It’s focused on shipping the minimum viable thing that your customers will put up their hands for as quickly as possible. 

The difference, though, is that MVE focuses on the whole customer experience. At its core, MVE looks at the experience of your users / customers, either with a replacement or existing product, and asks “what is that the minimum experience we will deliver which will still satisfy our customers?” 

Now, we’d like to mean here that MVE isn’t an excuse for rubbish user experience, brand, or marketing. It’s not an excuse to possess 40-minute wait-times when 5 minutes are the norm, or arcane, complex terms of service, or signs that are hard to follow or apps that crash. 

Rather, it’s about recognizing that your customers’ buy experiences consist of quite just buying and using your product. It’s about delivering the minimum acceptable level of experience together with your product or service, as quickly and inexpensively as possible, without alienating your users, and supplying you with the space to experiment and test.

For example, let’s say you would like to launch a replacement luxury brand to compete with Louis Vuitton handbags. 

Your MVP might just be a gorgeous handbag. Except for your MVE, you would possibly need to invest hundreds and thousands of dollars into your retail location to satisfy the experience expectations of your audience. 

On the flipside, say you’re building a measurement converter app for cooking ingredients (e.g. what proportion does a cup of rice weigh in grams?) Your MVP might just be an app that has the ingredients that the majority of people want to convert. But your your MVE also includes:

  • The app is out there in Google Play and therefore the App Store
  • It’s easy to seek out supported keyword searches

The point is, customer experience doesn’t start the second they open your opp or unbox your product. there’s supporting experiential infrastructure that you simply got to build also so you’ll get clean data and feedback you’ll iterate with.

Now before you get too excited, yes — MVE and MVP got to work together. 

An MVP is useless if the experience is just too terrible to urge any good learnings from, and an experience of nothing goes to be no experience in the least . They are, essentially, two sides of an equivalent coin, and you would like to possess both so as to urge meaningful data you’ll use in development . 


How to get an MVE

Because there’s no limit to what constitutes an MVE, it is often difficult to make a decision on how to build one. There are dozens of frameworks online, but an easy one that we like comes from a 2016 research paper.