What Comes First for Startups: Minimum Viable Product (MVP) or Community (MVC)?
Early-on, many startup founding teams establish their vision of both introducing technology and building an online community around that technology. Their goal is to foster a community that eventually provides both technical support and sales opportunities for their products. Founders and startup leaders also cite the importance of online communities in scaling their businesses through word-of-mouth and the network effect. To facilitate community creation and development, teams allocate budget accordingly.
Far too often, however, building an online community gets short shrift. This is especially true relative to building products – throughout the company’s seed funding stages, and in Series A and subsequent rounds.
In order to make online communities successful, startups should consider a development approach that includes, prominently, building a minimum viable community (MVC) – similar to a minimum viable product (MVP) – from the company’s inception. An MVC should include a feedback mechanism, metrics, forums for design and innovative thinking related to the community itself. That’s in addition, of course, to feedback and forums related to the MVP as a product.
Today MVP is a mainstream concept. It represents, according to Eric Reis – author of The Lean Startup – “that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort.” -
MVC – as defined by Alexis Ohanian, co-founder of Reddit – has been around for a long time as a concept, but not as a pervasive startup imperative. MVC is an early instance of an online community that has the goal of ultimately becoming a robust, multilayer community. This could be a B2C community populated with end-users, or an open source community populated with mainly B2B software developers, hobbyists and others. MVCs can be initiated by a number of parties, such as a few GTM partners, or company advisors and allies. They can also be commenced by a set of motivated users. In the FinTech sector, for example, an MVC might be initiated by business and technical managers who want to solve a cyber-security or cyber-fraud hack which has beleaguered them and the financial industry.
The critical ingredients needed to build a vibrant and self-sustaining MVC include:
A well-defined concept and clear set of goals communicated to potential participants,
A “rock star” community manager who encourages communications, shares info and data, and fosters relationships when appropriate,
An effective feedback mechanism for gathering inputs about features, functionality, and other relevant subjects,
User metrics to provide insights on the health and welfare of the community – such as hours accessed, churn, referrals, etc., and importantly,
An understanding that the community will be always free of charge, and
Indefatigable, unrelenting executive, technical, marketing and administrative support from the startup at the community’s center.
On a deeper level, the success of the MVC, and subsequently a permanent community, primarily hinges on identifying and supporting dedicated members of the customer base – a core constituency. In Open Source language, these are ‘maintainers’ and ‘sustainers’. In addition, they join and remain deeply involved because their efforts are facilitated by an effective feedback mechanism. For most technology communities, Slack channels and GitHub are two distinct tools that provide the general communication and feedback capabilities required. In addition, there’s the ubiquitous comms tools: email, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc.
In addition, it’s important to make the development of the MVC and permanent community a central tenet and high priority in the lead company’s GTM strategy and its product-led growth plans. In fact, it should be more than a goal; it should be ingrained in the company’s DNA. Moreover, the company should steer its hiring efforts towards people who have been involved in successful and innovative online communities. Another foundational element required for these communities is a set of rules that company staffers and external members live by equally. These rules establish policies and boundaries for communications, such as limitations of interaction. This requires community monitoring and some offline Zoom meetings to discuss issues that come up.
The MVC strategy can and does apply to more than just B2B and B2C startups. It can also be highly effective for B2G and B2B2B entities, and others. When properly designed, executed, and supported, MVCs ultimately will save time and startup resources – just like an MVP.
So, the question is: What should you build first: A Community or an MVP?
I think that the answer is to build a community first if your company is either B2B and B2C.
Bearing in mind that there’s “some assembly required” with MVCs and MVPs, let’s consider the assembly specifics associated with each. First, consider the one current point of view (CPOV) and an alternative take:
CPOV: Based on their education, experience and instincts, startup founders regard MVPs as “all important” because of their tangible value (i.e., one highly placed rung on the ladder of value) for funding purposes.
Alternative Take: This is true; however, the value of an MVP is significantly enhanced – and validated – when it’s supported by a vibrant MVC and ultimately, a fully functioning community.
CPOV: An MVP is what a startup needs to efficiently obtain customer data and to create a feedback loop for continuous improvements in the product.
Alternative Take: An MVC is a necessary precursor if one intends to eventually have a fully functional and successful community. It’s impossible to go from “0 to 60” with community building. They have to be built one step at a time. To realize a ’mature’ community that helps validate the product idea, iterate and improve the product in a lean startup context, and subsequently embrace product-led growth, the MVC is an early must-have.
CPOV: An MVP leads to proof-of-concept (POC) projects or introductions to early-adopters who will use the product and, in turn, become paying customers with ARR.
Alternative Take: ARR carries significant value in the early and later stage startup funding world. But a vibrant MVC – especially in conjunction with an MVP – will result in an enhanced (likely significantly higher) company valuation over time.
CPOV: MVPs are an important stepping stone in launching a product or service. That launch underwrites the company brand, reinforces value on a rung on the ladder-of-value, and provides a center-of-gravity for a GTM strategy.
Alternative Take: An MVC, and subsequently a fully functional community, is an indispensable stepping stone in launching a product or service.
CPOV: It takes time and effort to build a community, and realize network effects. A startup has to focus and doesn’t have abundant resources to do, effectively, two major undertakings (both an MVC and MVP) at once.
Alternative Take: An MVC is clearly a major undertaking. But a fully functional community is a requirement for a successful open source project which, in turn, frequently leads to a successful commercial product or service. Startup leaders can’t afford not to do both. Furthermore, a fully functional community will help a company save time and precious startup resources.
CPOV: You can’t fully test your GTM channels without an MVP. You can build a community once you have a product or service to build it around.
Alternative Take: You need time to develop a fully functional and successful community. An MVC is the first step in that process. Furthermore, today innovators and early adopters alike expect to see a vibrant community before making any commitments, whether to a POC, tinkering with the product, or purchasing it. It’s a criterion on innovators’ and early-adopters’ (largely mental) due diligence list and their approach to time management.
In sum, MVC development requires resources and focus, but it’s a very effective way to maximize product-market potential. Therefore, build an MVC first or in conjunction with an MVP, and subsequently launch your community alongside your product or services, and go from there. It’s just the way the startup world works today. Accommodating it rather than trying to buck it is a far more viable strategy.