The MVP curse

The term "Minimum Viable Product" (MVP) or "Proof of Concept" (POC) has become a buzzword in the tech industry. It's considered the holy grail of product development, allowing for quick iteration and market-testing with minimum resources. But, there's a dark side to this approach we can name the "MVP Curse".

# Testing and Documentation are luxuries

The first casualty of the MVP Curse is the practice of testing. In the rush to ship, integration and unit tests, which ensure the robustness of the product, are often sidelined.

The second sin is the lack of documentation. Proper technical documentation might seem redundant initially, but its absence can lead to inconsistency, confusion, and inefficiency in the development cycle.

# Agile misinterpretations

The Agile mindset, promising adaptability and responsiveness, often falls prey to the MVP Curse. Misconstrued as a license to work without a strategic plan or solid architecture, this misinterpretation paves the way for a growing technical debt.

# The vortex of technical debt

The fourth pitfall is the sacrifice of quality for the sake of speed. In the pursuit of "good enough", companies often abandon their "Definition of Done" standards, causing a downward spiral into a vortex of technical debt and endless bug fixes.

# Technical debt is a business problem

The final and perhaps the most dangerous misconception is the assumption that technical debt is a developer's problem. In reality, technical debt can significantly impact business operations, making the codebase hard to maintain and slow to adapt to changes. This becomes a significant bottleneck to the success of the application and its future development.

# Wrong mindset

Unfortunately, the MVP mindset can transform into a disease spreading amongst tech professionals. It promotes a culture of doing the bare minimum while drastically reducing quality standards. This shift overlooks the fact that what might be deemed "good enough for now" often leads to long-term challenges. When consistently adopted, this decline in quality progressively undermines the effectiveness and value of a tech product.

# Building houses without blueprints

Moreover, this curse obscures fundamental engineering principles. The pursuit of speed and minimalism often results in disregarding essential components such as solid architecture, analytical thinking, and careful feature design. These are the cornerstones of robust, scalable, and user-friendly applications. Ignoring these core components is akin to building a house without a blueprint—it may stand for a while, but it won't withstand the test of time.

This dangerous mindset, once embedded in a team or an organization, is challenging to uproot. It encourages a cycle of minimal effort and mediocre output, leading to project failure, dwindling team morale, professional stagnation, and a tarnished reputation.

# Conclusion

The MVP concept, while beneficial, should not be an end in itself. It’s a tool for validating ideas quickly but not a free pass to bypass essential engineering principles or lower quality standards. Recognizing the potential pitfalls and maintaining a balance between speed, quality, and robustness can leverage the strengths of the MVP approach without succumbing to the MVP Curse.

In essence, the MVP Curse is a sign of imbalance in our approach to product development. By recognizing the dangers and working to prevent them, we can create successful, sustainable, and adaptable tech products that genuinely add value to users and businesses alike. MVPs and POCs are part of the journey, but they aren't the whole path. Recognizing this distinction is crucial to breaking free from the MVP Curse. Cheers!!