Willard Logo
Mvps

MVPs for Startups: What They Are and How to Define Them

33 min readMay 18, 2025

Tayler Hughes

Founder & CEO

Early-stage founders often hear they need an MVP – a Minimum Viable Product. But what exactly does that mean? How minimal should it be, and what makes it viable? This guide is a plainspoken, founder-to-founder look at MVPs: clearing up misconceptions, outlining how to define an MVP properly, and showing how to balance speed with delivering a usable experience. We’ll also dive into real startup MVP examples (e.g. MVP vs prototype, famous minimum viable product examples) and common pitfalls (like rushing out something so “minimal” that it forgets the “viable” part). By the end, you should have a solid grasp of MVPs – effectively an “MVP bible” – to help you build smart and test what really matters.

Writing materials

MVPs for Startups: What They Are and How to Define Them

Early-stage founders often hear they need an MVP -- a Minimum Viable Product. But what exactly does that mean? How minimal should it be, and what makes it viable? This guide is a plainspoken, founder-to-founder look at MVPs: clearing up misconceptions, outlining how to define an MVP properly, and showing how to balance speed with delivering a usable experience. We'll also dive into real startup MVP examples (e.g. MVP vs prototype, famous minimum viable product examples) and common pitfalls (like rushing out something so "minimal" that it forgets the "viable" part). By the end, you should have a solid grasp of MVPs -- effectively an "MVP bible" -- to help you build smart and test what really matters.

What is a Minimum Viable Product (MVP)?

In simple terms, an MVP is the smallest version of a product that can be built to deliver value to early users and test key assumptions. It's not just a proof-of-concept or a demo -- it's a basic but functional product meant for real users. Eric Ries (who introduced the term in The Lean Startup) defines an MVP as "the version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort."atlassian.com In practice, that means an MVP has just enough core features to satisfy early customers and gather feedback for future development. It's a way to put something into users' hands quickly, learn what works or doesn't, and avoid investing huge time and money into a full product without evidence that people actually want it.

The purpose of an MVP is learning. By releasing a very early product, you can observe real user behavior, test whether your solution solves their problem, and iterate accordingly. Think of it as an experiment: you have a hypothesis ("my target customer has X problem and will use Y solution"), and the MVP is how you test that hypothesis with minimal waste. As one university entrepreneurship guide puts it, you "do not need a completed product to test your most risky assumptions... An MVP can be a video, a landing page, or even a physical model"tilburguniversity.edu -- whatever form allows you to quickly get feedback from real users or customers. The key is that it's real enough for users to try and for you to learn from.

Common Misconceptions About MVPs

The concept of MVP is widely used -- and widely misunderstood. Let's clear up a few myths and clarify what an MVP is and isn't:

  • MVP is Not Just a "Minimal Product" Built Cheap: A very common misconception is that an MVP means making a bare-bones, low-quality version of your product and shipping it as fast as possiblerailsware.com. Yes, an MVP should be minimal in terms of features, but "minimal" doesn't mean "crappy." The goal isn't to put out a shoddy app or a half-functional service and call it a day. The goal is to strip the product down to its core value so you can test that value with users -- while still making it a viable, usable product. If your MVP is just a broken shell, you won't learn much (except that users hate broken products).

  • MVP ≠ Prototype or Proof-of-Concept: Don't confuse an MVP with a prototype or a PoC (Proof of Concept). A prototype is usually an early mock-up or model used internally to test or demonstrate a concept -- it might be a clickable design or a rough demo, often not fully functional or ready for real customers. Its main purpose is to validate design ideas or feasibility and gather feedback in-house (or from a small user test), not to serve actual customers. An MVP, on the other hand, is a real product you release to early adopters in the marketproductschool.com. As one product expert puts it: a prototype is something you show or test, while an MVP is something you sell or at least deliver to usersproductschool.com. The MVP is customer-facing -- the P stands for "Product," meaning it should be usable by your target users in a real settingproductschool.com. A proof-of-concept (PoC) is different as well: it's typically an internal exercise to prove a certain technology or approach can workrailsware.com. For example, you might build a quick PoC to see if a new AI algorithm can do what you need, but that PoC isn't something you'd give to customers. In summary: Prototypes and PoCs test feasibility or design, MVPs test market viability.

  • An MVP is Not an Alpha/Beta or Final Product: Terms like "alpha" and "beta" releases refer to early versions of a product, but they're usually more complete than an MVP and come later in development (often tested with a limited audience for polish and bug fixes). An MVP comes earlier: it's about validating the core idea. Also, an MVP is not your end goal -- it's the beginning of an iterative process. You're not trying to win over the whole market with your MVP or have all the bells and whistles; you're trying to answer the question "Is our core solution something people want?" Only after an MVP proves that, you move toward a more feature-rich product. (In fact, some say MVPs are by definition not fully marketable or "complete" -- they're a learning vehicle. The real Version 1.0 of your product might come after several MVP iterations and learning cycles.)

  • MVP is Not Just a Slice of Features: A mistake teams make is to take a big feature list for the full product and just build a few of those features as the MVP. If doing so means the product no longer actually solves a whole problem for the user, then it's not a true MVPproductplan.comproductplan.com. (We'll dive more into this "viability" issue next.) An MVP isn't just any random subset of features; it's the minimal cohesive set of functionality needed to deliver the primary value. For example, if you're building a ride-sharing app, an MVP might only let users hail a ride and pay -- without the fancy extras -- but it must cover that entire use case (rider meets driver, payment happens, ride is completed). If your "MVP" left out the payment mechanism or a way to actually request the ride, it wouldn't fully solve the problem, and users would be left hanging. In short, an MVP must fully address at least one user need or use-case from end to end -- even if it does nothing elseproductplan.comproductplan.com.

  • MVP Won't Guarantee Funding or Success Overnight: Some founders think building an MVP will immediately attract investors or masses of users. While a solid MVP can indeed help you raise funding (by demonstrating traction or demand) and is essential to finding product-market fit, it's not a magic bullet. The MVP's purpose is to validate and learn. It's possible your MVP will show that your idea doesn't resonate -- and that's okay, because it saves you from a bigger failure. Use that learning to pivot or iterate. On the flip side, if users love your MVP, you still have a lot of work ahead to scale it into a fully featured, stable product. So manage expectations: the MVP is the start of the journey, not the finish line.

How to Define an MVP for Your Startup

So, how do you actually define what your MVP should be? Especially if you're moving fast with limited design or resources, how do you decide what goes into that first version? Here's a step-by-step approach:

  1. Clearly Identify the Core User Problem (Pain Point): Every great product starts with a problem that needs solving. Begin by asking: What is the primary problem we're aiming to solve, and for whom? Be specific. If you can't succinctly describe the pain point your MVP addresses, you're not ready to build one. Talk to potential users, research their needs, and pinpoint the must-have problem. (In lean startup terms, find the assumption that "if this problem doesn't exist or isn't painful, nothing else matters.") For example, Uber's founders identified that "hailing a cab in certain situations (night time, bad weather, etc.) is difficult and unreliable", which was a clear pain pointatlassian.com. The MVP for Uber (back when it was "UberCab") was simply an app to request a black car easily -- focusing on solving that one problem of "I need a ride now" in a basic way.

  2. Define the Value Proposition and Hypothesis: Based on the problem, articulate your hypothesis: "We believe that [doing X] for [target users] will solve [problem Y] and they will [take Z action -- e.g. use it, pay for it, etc.]." This hypothesis frames what you need to learn. For instance, "We believe busy urban professionals will use an app that lets them book a car ride with one tap, and will pay a premium for the convenience." The MVP is there to test this hypothesis. Part of this step is figuring out what "viable" means for your idea -- i.e. what core value must be delivered to consider the product a success for users. Is it saving them time? Making something cheaper? More convenient? Your MVP's job is to deliver that core value in the simplest way.

  3. List Core Features (and Cut the Rest): Now brainstorm what features or components are needed to deliver the core value. This is where you separate "must-haves" from "nice-to-haves." A useful mindset is: What is the minimum feature set that allows a user to achieve the primary goal or solve the problem? Anything that is not directly in service of that should be left out of the MVP. For example, if you're making a simple file-sharing service MVP, the must-haves might be: upload a file, generate a share link, and allow download. A fancy user profile system or friend lists or detailed analytics are nice-to-have extras -- not needed in the MVP. One way to do this is using the MoSCoW method (Must, Should, Could, Won't have) to prioritize features, ensuring the Must-haves cover a full user flow. Remember, the MVP should fully enable one use-case. As product experts say, don't just build a disjointed slice of each part of the product; build a small product that completely satisfies one needproductplan.comproductplan.com. If you're unsure, ask: "Can a user achieve their goal with this set of features? Or will they feel something critical is missing?" If the latter, you haven't cut correctly. It's better to have fewer features that actually work well and solve the problem, than a grab bag of partial features.

  4. Ensure It's Viable: The Experience Must Deliver Value -- This is crucial. Viable means that the product is good enough that users can actually use it for its intended purpose and get value from it. In other words, it solves the problem in a way that's acceptable to the user. This doesn't imply the solution is perfect or pretty, but it can't be so subpar that it fails at the only job it's supposed to do. As one product veteran puts it, your MVP needs to at least provide "a complete solution for the user in at least one area"productplan.com -- the user can accomplish something and get a real benefit. For example, if your MVP is a ride-hailing app, maybe it only works in one city and has no ride-tracking map or rating system yet -- that's fine. But if it frequently fails to actually connect riders with drivers, or the car never shows up, that's not a viable service. A common mistake is losing the "viable" aspect in the rush to minimize: releasing a product that technically exists but doesn't truly solve the user's problem or is too buggy/confusing to use. If customers try your app and can't get the core value from it, they'll abandon it -- and you'll learn the wrong lesson. (They might have loved the idea if it worked, but you'll interpret their absence as "they didn't want it.") So, make sure the MVP meets some basic quality bar. It should be simple, but functional and reliable in its narrow scope.

  5. Choose the Fastest, Cheapest Way to Build It: Since speed is a priority, think creatively about how to build your MVP. It doesn't always mean coding a whole system from scratch. Could you use a no-code tool, or a WordPress template, or off-the-shelf components? Could the "backend" of your MVP be manual for now? (This is often called a "Wizard of Oz" MVP -- the front-end looks automated but behind the scenes you do things manually at first.) Classic example: Zappos. The founder Nick Swinmurn wanted to test if people would buy shoes online. Instead of building a full e-commerce site with inventory, his MVP was literally a makeshift process: he took photos of shoes at local stores and put them on a simple website; when a customer ordered a pair, he'd go buy it from the store and ship it to themtilburguniversity.edu. This way he validated demand for online shoe sales without writing complex software or investing in stock. Similarly, Dropbox famously tested its concept with just an explanatory video rather than a fully built product, to gauge if people cared about easy file syncing -- they garnered 70,000 signups from that demo video aloneproductschool.comproductschool.com. The lesson: don't over-engineer your MVP. Use the tools and shortcuts that get you a testable product fastest. If design resources are low, use basic but usable UI frameworks or templates. If you lack some feature on the back-end, consider doing it manually for the first few users. You're aiming for speed as long as you can still deliver the core user experience.

  6. Define Success Metrics and Feedback Loops: Before launching the MVP, decide how you'll measure outcomes and gather insights. What user behaviors or metrics will indicate that the idea is working (or not)? It could be sign-up rates, conversion to paid, retention over a couple weeks, or even qualitative feedback like user interviews. Having clear success criteria or at least learning goals is important. For example, you might say: "If at least 20% of users who sign up for our MVP use it again the following week, that's a sign of genuine value." Or "We'll consider the MVP validated if we can get 100 pre-orders or paid subscriptions in the first month." Also plan how you'll get feedback: built-in analytics, surveys, personal calls with early users, etc. Remember, an MVP is not a "launch it and forget it" -- it's an experiment, and you need to observe and interpret the results.

By following the above steps, you craft an MVP that is tightly aligned with your riskiest assumptions and core user needs, without extra fluff. It bears repeating: the MVP should do one thing really well -- the main thing your users care about. Everything else can come later. As the saying goes, "If you're not embarrassed by your first release, you launched too late." There's truth in that -- but make sure you're embarrassed by missing features or polish, not by the product failing at its primary purpose.

Real-World MVP Examples (and What They Teach Us)

It's helpful to see how other startups approached their MVPs. Here are a few famous (and illustrative) minimum viable product examples:

  • Zappos (1999): Vision: An online store for shoes. Problem: Will people buy shoes online without trying them on? MVP Approach: Nick Swinmurn didn't build a warehouse or fancy site. He simply took photos of shoes from local stores and listed them online. Whenever a customer placed an order on his rudimentary website, he would go purchase that pair from the store and ship it out manuallytilburguniversity.edu. This concierge-style MVP proved that customers were willing to buy shoes online (demand validated!), before scaling up. Lesson: You can fake the backend to test the frontend demand. If nobody ordered, he'd know the idea was a dud with minimal loss. Because it worked, he later invested in building out infrastructure, and Zappos eventually became a billion-dollar e-commerce leader.

  • Dropbox (2007): Vision: Seamless file synchronization across devices. Problem: Do people actually care enough about easy file syncing? MVP Approach: Drew Houston (founder of Dropbox) made a simple 3-minute video demonstrating how Dropbox would work -- even though the product wasn't fully built yetproductschool.comproductschool.com. The video showed a folder on his computer magically syncing files to the cloud and back. This explainer video MVP went viral on Hacker News, and some 70,000 people joined the waitlist, essentially saying "we want this now!"productschool.com That was strong validation of user interest, which helped secure funding and guided the team to build the real product. Lesson: An MVP doesn't have to be software -- a video or mockup can be enough to gauge demand. If an idea is compelling, showing the concept can be sufficient to test market interest before writing a line of code.

  • Groupon (2008): Vision: A platform for group deals and coupons. Problem: Will people buy local deals in a new online format? MVP Approach: Groupon started with the simplest thing: a basic WordPress blog. They would post one deal a day manually, and when people signed up, the team emailed PDF coupons to the buyers by handproductschool.com. No custom platform, no automated payment system at first -- just WordPress and PDFs. As demand grew and the model proved out, they built the proper website and backend. Lesson: Start with off-the-shelf tools. If WordPress and email can deliver the service, use that until you must automate. It's not about looking high-tech; it's about validating that businesses will offer deals and customers will grab them.

  • Airbnb (2008): Vision: Let homeowners rent out space to travelers. Problem: Will strangers pay to stay in someone's home? MVP Approach: The founders literally started by renting out their own apartment in San Francisco during a conference when hotels were booked out. They put up a simple website (airbedandbreakfast.com) advertising an airbed in their living room and homemade breakfast. They got 3 customers for ~$80 eachproductschool.com. That tiny test -- three paying users -- was enough to validate that people were open to the concept. From there, they expanded to other hosts and events. Lesson: An MVP can be as small as a one-city, one-event trial. By being the first hosts themselves, the founders learned what both hosts and guests would need. It proved the concept without any scalable platform initially.

  • Spotify (2007): Vision: On-demand music streaming. Problem: Will users pay for streaming, and is the core experience compelling? MVP Approach: Spotify's team launched a closed beta in Sweden that did one thing really well: stream music quickly and reliablyproductschool.com. The MVP had no elaborate features like custom playlists, recommendations, social sharing, podcasts, etc. -- just a working music player with a decent catalog of songs. Because it delivered immediate value (any song, anytime) with a great user experience in that narrow scope, the beta users loved itproductschool.com. This validated both user desire and the tech, giving confidence to roll out more features and markets. Lesson: Focus on your killer feature. Spotify identified that on-demand streaming itself was the killer feature; they ignored all "nice extras" at first. By nailing streaming quality and speed (the core viability of a music app), they won users who were then hungry for more.

These examples show how MVPs can vary -- from a manual, Wizard-of-Oz style process (Zappos), to a non-product video demo (Dropbox), to extremely pared-down functional products (Spotify). All of them kept costs and complexity low, but still delivered a form of the core experience to users. Notice that in each case, the MVP was good enough to use: customers could actually buy shoes, watch a "working" demo, book a stay, listen to songs, etc. The founders then used what they learned (e.g. signups, feedback, usage patterns) to iterate or secure resources to build the full vision.

Don't Lose the "Viable" in MVP

One of the biggest pitfalls in building an MVP is focusing so much on the "minimum" that you sacrifice the "viable." Remember: viable = provides value and is usable enough to retain early users. If you put out a product that's technically minimal but fails to satisfy users in any way, you've essentially built a MP (Minimum Product) without the V (Viable).

Why is this a problem? Because introducing users to a poor experience can backfire badly. If your MVP disappoints or frustrates those first users, they may leave and never come back -- even if you improve it laterproductplan.comproductplan.com. Early adopters are more forgiving than mainstream customers, but there's a limit. As ProductPlan warns, "If you misinterpret the MVP's true meaning, you risk introducing users to a product that is just short (and sometimes way short) of their expectations. Worse, if you underwhelm or disappoint this early group of users, in many cases they won't give your product another chance."productplan.com In other words, you get one shot with many users -- so make it count.

So what makes an MVP truly viable? Two key ingredients: it solves at least one real problem fully, and it delights (or at least satisfies) the user in the processproductplan.comproductplan.com. Solving a problem fully means, as discussed, the MVP's feature set is coherent enough to let the user accomplish a goal. The user shouldn't feel like "this is only 30% done" when using it. Even if it's bare-bones, they should walk away saying "yes, it helped me do X." The second part -- delight or satisfaction -- is often overlooked. This doesn't mean your MVP needs fancy design or gimmicks; it means there should be something about the experience that makes the user pleasantly surprised or happy to use it. Maybe it's the convenience, or the speed, or a particular little feature that's clever. It's the opposite of the user feeling: "Ugh, this was painful but I guess it kind of worked." Some product experts argue that an MVP should not just satisfy, but also delight to truly be effectiveproductplan.comproductplan.com. That might be as simple as a snappy response time, a clean UI, or a friendly onboarding message -- anything that leaves a positive impression. After all, you want those early users to continue using the product (and ideally tell others), not churn immediately.

A practical way to ensure viability is to test your MVP on a few friendly users before a broader launch. Observe if they can actually complete the main task and if they seem happy or frustrated. If their reaction is "I see what this could be, but in its current state I wouldn't bother using it," you likely need to improve the experience before calling it a viable MVP. Sometimes adding a tiny bit of polish or guidance can make the difference between a user saying "this is too rough" and "it's simple but cool." For instance, if an app is very minimal, even adding a quick tutorial or FAQ for early users can help them forgive the minimalism and engage with the core value.

Marty Cagan, a renowned product thought leader, emphasizes focusing on that viability during discovery. He differentiates a "Minimal Product" (the smallest thing that technically works) from a "Viable Product" (something that people actually choose to use)svpg.com. Many teams, he notes, can build something usable, but the real question is "would you use it?", not just "could you use it"svpg.com. He warns that the "viable" part is usually the hardest and highest-risk piece, so you should spend most of your energy figuring that outsvpg.com. In practice, this might mean you deliberately include one or two elements in your MVP that elevate the user experience -- for example, decent visual design or an extra feature that wows -- to ensure people actually like the product. There's a popular concept now called the "Minimum Lovable Product" (MLP), promoted by folks like HubSpot's Dharmesh Shah, which argues that your first product should aim to make users love something about it, not just tolerate itrailsware.com. The idea behind MLP is closely related to what we're discussing: it's an MVP that users want to use, not one they feel they have to use. It's a reaction to the flood of so-called MVPs that were "minimum" but not enjoyable.

To avoid losing the viable aspect, put yourself in the user's shoes honestly. Would you use your product in its current MVP form? Would you recommend it to a friend? If the honest answer is "not really" (even though you believe in the idea), consider why. Maybe it's too slow, or looks untrustworthy, or the workflow has gaps. You might not be able to fix everything, but try to address the top pain point. Remember, MVP isn't an excuse to deliver poor quality on the core experience. It's a mandate to deliver the core experience and nothing else -- but do that core well.

Balancing Speed and User Experience in an MVP

Startup founders often face a dilemma: "We need to ship fast, but we also want a great user experience. If we prioritize speed (engineering), will the product's design and UX suffer?" It's a valid concern. On one hand, you hear "just launch your MVP quickly!" On the other, you know a clunky UX can doom your product. Striking the right balance is key.

Prioritize User Needs, Not Perfection: Even when racing to build an MVP, keep a user-centric mindset from day one. This doesn't mean doing a six-month polished design phase, but it means understanding what users care about most and ensuring the MVP delivers on that. Studies of startup failures have shown that the #1 reason is building something nobody wants -- often due to not understanding customer needseteam.io. A bit of early UX research can go a long way. Simply interviewing a handful of potential users or observing them can highlight their biggest pain points and what they expect at minimum. Good UX is about meeting those basic expectations. For example, if users absolutely need a search function to use your app (because that's how they find things), leaving that out might make the MVP non-viable. However, they might not care if the interface is a generic bootstrap theme -- as long as they can accomplish their goal easily.

Don't Skip Design Completely: It's tempting for engineers to say "we'll add proper design later, let's just get it working." This approach can be dangerous. "Not prioritizing UX from the beginning can lead to devastating consequences for your startup," as one UX-focused article put iteteam.io. If the product isn't usable or doesn't resonate, users won't adopt it, and you'll have no one to give feedback. Even a simple MVP needs to be designed for users -- which means clear navigation, basic aesthetics, and intuitive workflow. You don't need a world-class visual design, but do ensure things like: the text is readable, buttons are where you'd expect, and the flow makes sense without extensive instructions. Often, following standard conventions is the easiest way to get decent UX with little effort (e.g., use common icons, familiar layouts, etc., so users aren't confused).

Leverage Lightweight UX Techniques: There are fast ways to incorporate design thinking. For instance, create a quick wireframe or sketch of the user flow before coding. This can expose glaring UX issues early. Perform a quick hallway usability test -- grab a friend or colleague (or better yet, a target user), give them the prototype/MVP, and see if they get it. Five minutes of watching someone struggle (or succeed) with your interface can inform a few small tweaks that make the product much more user-friendly. Founders can also use templates or design systems to speed up UI work. There are plenty of free or cheap UI kits that ensure a baseline of good design without custom work.

Accept "Good Enough" UI, but Not Horrible UI: There is a middle ground between pixel-perfect design and no design at all. Aim for that middle. For example, maybe you won't invest time in fancy graphics or a unique brand style for the MVP, but you will put effort into clear copywriting and simple, clean layout. Often, clear instructional text or error messages are part of UX -- don't neglect those in an MVP. If something is likely to confuse users, add a one-line explanation or simplify it until it's self-explanatory. Since you won't have customer support teams at MVP stage, your design and copy have to do the heavy lifting to guide users.

Timebox Your Design Efforts: One practical tip is to literally timebox how long you'll spend on UX/design in the MVP phase -- but make sure it's not zero. For example, decide that you'll spend two weeks on basic UX work before coding, or that you'll allocate 15% of the MVP development time to polishing the UI and fixing usability issues. This ensures you consciously invest in user experience, but it also prevents analysis paralysis or gold-plating. You can always improve the design later; for now, you just need it to be serviceable and not a barrier to usage.

Founders and Teams Should Collaborate (Engineering + Design): If you have a team where one person is more product/design-oriented and another is engineering-focused, leverage that dynamic. While engineers build the backend or core features, a product/design person can concurrently design the UI, write the copy, and plan the onboarding. If you're a solo founder with limited design skills, consider bringing in a freelance designer just for a design sprint, or use design communities for quick feedback. Even your developer friends can give UI feedback -- sometimes fresh eyes spot UI problems quickly.

It's worth noting that some UX experts critique the MVP approach for often producing poor user experiences. As the Nielsen Norman Group (leaders in UX) pointed out, rushing out a "minimally viable" product can lead to "poorly integrated user experience" if done carelesslynngroup.com. For a startup, this usually means that if you ignore UX entirely, you might end up with a product that technically works but is so unpleasant that it fails to gain traction. The remedy is not to abandon MVPs, but to integrate UX into the MVP process -- as an equal partner to engineering. In practice, that could mean having a UX designer or product manager co-define the MVP scope (to ensure user flows make sense) and co-create the acceptance criteria ("the user must be able to accomplish X within Y steps" can be a criterion, not just "the API returns Z output").

Example scenario: Imagine a founder prioritizes engineering and churns out an MVP for a new team collaboration tool. It technically has the features (create projects, invite users, post updates). But there was zero design thought: the navigation is confusing, there's no onboarding, and it's not clear how to start a project. They release it quickly, but users sign up and then immediately get lost and disengage. The founder might conclude "teams don't really need my tool" when in fact the tool's usability was the issue, not the concept. Contrast that with a scenario where the founder spent a bit of time on UX: they add a simple welcome tutorial, put labels on icons, and streamline the project creation flow to one button. Now users who sign up can actually use the tool and see its value. The feedback becomes meaningful ("we wish it also did X" or "Y was a bit slow") rather than "I didn't understand it, gave up."

Bottom line: To balance speed and UX, do the least you can do in design that yields a usable, understandable product -- and no less. As one startup UX article neatly summarized: "Even your MVP needs to be designed for users... However, UX design shouldn't delay your MVP. Releasing and testing an early product as soon as possible is one of the keys... In addition, testing your MVP is where a UX team member can be most helpful."eteam.ioeteam.io In other words, invest in just enough UX so that your fast release still delivers real insight and doesn't flop purely due to avoidable design issues. Then, once the MVP is out, continue to watch how users interact with it -- UX work isn't one-and-done. Use the data (where do users drop off? what do they click? what feedback do they give?) to iterate both your features and the design in tandem.

Engineering vs. Design: The Right Mindset

It's common in early startups to have a very engineering-driven culture, especially if the founders are developers. That can lead to an implicit bias of "features and code first, user experience later." Be cautious with that approach. A healthier mindset is product-first -- meaning you consider the combination of engineering, design, and user needs together when planning the MVP.

Think of building an MVP like constructing a bridge to your users: engineering is the steel and concrete, design is the blueprint and user pathway. If you skimp completely on the blueprint, you might still erect a structure quickly, but it could be one that no one can cross (or wants to). On the flip side, spending forever on blueprints and polishing (design) without laying down steel (code) means the bridge never gets built. So, the right mindset is to iterate on both: maybe you sketch a basic blueprint (design) -> build part of the bridge (code) -> see if people can walk a few steps (user test) -> adjust the plan -> build more, etc.

In concrete terms for an MVP:

  • Let user stories drive development. Write simple narratives like "User needs to do X, so they click button Y and see result Z." This ensures engineering builds features that align with a coherent user flow.

  • Embrace iterative design. Your MVP's design can be iterated just like features. It doesn't have to be fully fleshed out from the start; you can refine UI elements in response to testing. The key is to have a usable base version to start with.

  • Be willing to throw away or redo parts of the MVP. The "V" in MVP also stands for Version in a sense -- it's just your first version. If some code or design was quick and dirty, you might refactor or redesign it later. That's expected. Don't get overly attached to any piece of the MVP; be ready to adjust based on what you learn.

  • Learn from each other's perspective: If you're a tech-heavy founder, try to think like a user or designer at times ("Is this feature discoverable? Will our target user understand this terminology?"). If you're more on the design side, understand the engineering trade-offs ("Implementing drag-and-drop nicely might take 2 extra weeks; maybe a simpler upload button is fine for MVP"). By understanding both sides, you can make smarter decisions on where to spend effort.

Final Thoughts: Your MVP as a Learning Tool

In summary, a great MVP for a startup is about finding the right balance:

  • Clarity over completeness: It clearly demonstrates the core value proposition, though it's not complete as a full product.

  • Usable but not fancy: It's user-friendly enough to not alienate users, but not loaded with bells and whistles.

  • Fast but not sloppy: It's built quickly and cheaply, but with enough thought that it actually works and provides insight.

As a founder, treat the MVP as your ally in discovery. It's there to answer questions and guide your next steps. Sometimes the MVP will validate your idea and you'll move forward confidently. Other times, it will invalidate a big assumption -- which is equally valuable, as it frees you to pivot or change course before it's too late. In all cases, be prepared to listen to what the users and data are telling you. The worst outcome is to ignore feedback and forge ahead with a predetermined plan; that defeats the purpose of doing an MVP at all.

One more thing: don't be afraid of a "failed" MVP. If nobody wants the product in its MVP form, that's not true failure -- it's information. Maybe you targeted the wrong problem, or the solution needs a tweak, or perhaps it's a messaging issue. Use that knowledge. Many successful startups went through multiple MVP iterations or even scrapped an MVP and built a new one based on what they learned. This is normal. The MVP process is inherently iterative: build → measure → learn → adjust (the classic lean startup looptilburguniversity.edu).

Lastly, keep the founder-to-founder spirit in mind: focus on value and learning, not vanity. It can be tempting to try to make your MVP look impressive for investors or press. But its real job is to teach you how to make something people love. If you achieve that, you'll have plenty of time to impress the world with the polished version. As Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn founder) famously suggested, "If you are not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you've launched too late." Embrace that sentiment -- just don't be so embarrassed that users see no value. 😉

Good luck defining and building your MVP! By keeping it truly minimum and truly viable, you maximize your chances of learning fast and building a product that succeeds. Each iteration will bring you closer to product-market fit. Remember, even the biggest startups began with something small and humble -- the difference is they made that small thing count.

Keywords to target: minimum viable product, MVP startup, how to define MVP, MVP vs prototype, MVP examples, MVP user experience, lean startup MVP, product-market fit.

Sources for Further Reading & Credibility:

These resources and case studies reinforce the points above and are great reads as you embark on your MVP journey. Remember: build quickly, but build to learn. Every MVP is a stepping stone to a better product. Good luck!