When people hear the term Minimum Viable Product, or MVP, they sometimes misinterpret it as permission to release a product that is full of bugs.
They think that because it is only the first version, it is acceptable for buttons not to work, pages to break, or users to encounter errors while trying to use the main functionality.
But that is not what an MVP is.
An MVP may be incomplete, but it should not be imperfect.
There is an important difference between the two.
An incomplete product does not have every feature yet. Some ideas are intentionally left out because they are not essential to solving the main problem. Those features can be added later once you understand what your customers actually need.
An imperfect product, on the other hand, fails to perform the function it was created to do. The core feature may exist, but it is unreliable. It has bugs. It frustrates users. It creates another problem instead of properly solving the original one.
That is not an MVP. That is simply a poorly tested product.
When you build an MVP, you still need to test it carefully. You still need to perform quality assurance. You need to confirm that every feature you decided to include works properly from beginning to end.
Your product does not need to do everything.
But whatever it promises to do, it should do well.
This is also where many founders become confused. They feel that their product is still imperfect because it does not have enough features. They keep adding more functionality before launching because they are afraid that the product will look too simple.
But simplicity is not a weakness when your product solves a real problem.
You need to ask yourself: Does this additional feature solve the main pain point of my customer?
If the answer is no, then you probably do not need to build it yet.
For example, I created a Shopify app called Faqly because one of my clients had a specific problem. They needed a way to add a custom FAQ section to each product page.
That was the pain point.
So, the first version of the app only needed to solve that problem: allow a merchant to create and display custom FAQs for individual products.
That is already a valid MVP.
Of course, while building it, I felt the urge to add more features. I thought about giving users multiple FAQ templates. I considered adding more design customization options. These ideas sounded useful, and part of me felt that the product would be incomplete without them.
But I had to remind myself of the purpose of an MVP.
Do those extra templates solve the main pain point?
Not necessarily.
The original problem was not that the client lacked different FAQ designs. The original problem was that the client could not add custom FAQs to individual products.
If the app solves that problem properly, then it is already doing its job.
The additional features may still be worth building later. But they should not delay the release of the core solution. It is better to launch a simple product, observe how people use it, and improve it based on real feedback.
At the same time, launching quickly does not mean becoming careless.
Before releasing the app, I still need to test whether merchants can create an FAQ, assign it to the correct product, edit it, save it, and display it properly on the storefront. I need to confirm that the core experience works smoothly.
The customer should not encounter bugs while using the main feature.
That is the balance you need to understand when building a product.
Do not add unnecessary features just because your product feels too simple.
But do not use the word “MVP” as an excuse to release something unreliable either.
Build the smallest version of your product that solves the customer’s main problem. Then make sure that the solution actually works.
An MVP should be a Minimum Viable Product.
Not an MBP: Minimum Buggy Product.