How do you explain your MVP to stakeholders?

Agree Siddharth, it defeats the purpose of "minimum" and become a fully fledged solution hence it takes much longer time to be delivered.

As a founder, it's crucial to understand that different people have different interests when it comes to your MVP. Think about it this way: customers might be wondering how your MVP solves their problems, investors might be interested in how it's going to make money and grow, and partners might want to know how it fits into their own plans.

One size never fits all, hence it's very important to reach a common ground on how the MVP will respond to all stakeholders' expectations.

In our organization and projects, we have recently started using the term "commercially viable product." This means that if you plan on marketing and selling a product, it needs to be functional and have a clear purpose for your target customers to purchase or use it. The ultimate goal is to achieve adoption and growth for your product.

Many can find it difficult to launch an MVP because they want to include so many features to bring their vision to life. From a product and marketing standpoint, a winning strategy is to pick a few key differentiators in the market and launch with those features first. For example, Uber had two key features that were painful with taxis—knowing when a driver would arrive and being able to leave without fumbling with payment. In the year since launching, Uber has built hundreds of other features, however, these were the two key features in their MVP.

The concept of “CVP” (commercially viable product), as @Kenneth Benavides mentioned above, is a game-changer when building new products, especially. Looking through the CVP “lense” provides the ability to truly define an MVP that addresses the “so what?” of all vested parties—the prioritization/scope needed, timeframe to deliver and many of the values/metrics mentioned above (problem to solve, value, ROI, sustainability, scalability, etc.). Ultimately, what’s the point of delivering something that’s “minimally viable,” if it’s not “commercially viable”? My thoughts: there’s not one—having CVP as your “North Star” when defining, and when executing, MVP is crucial to success.

Fellow founders, it's important to know that not everyone will be easily convinced by your MVP. Some will have doubts, concerns, or worries about things like if it can actually work, if it can grow smoothly, etc. and to tackle these concerns head-on and show that you're on top of things (or planning to be). You can share proof that your MVP has been tested and validated, and lay out a clear plan of what features you're going to add and what goals you're aiming for. It's also smart to prepare for any obstacles that might pop up. You should also be ready to back up your claims with actual data, experiments, or feedback. Show how you've picked the most important things to work on, and the milestones you're reaching.

You build an MVP to test certain, critical hypotheses of your venture. The important question is: does your MVP prove these specific hypotheses. If yes, then it is not to worrisome if other aspects of your MVP are not perfect. Example: you're in the solar business game and your core hypothesis is that people are more easily convinced to lease photovoltaics for their roof for a monthly fee rather than paying a big amount upfront. If people are quickly convinced to sign the leasing contract, it's OK (not desirable, but OK) if the mounting process and interactions with the craftspeople take a little longer than customers would like. You can improve on that. But you proved your core assumption regarding your customers preferences.

Discuss Success Criteria: Define what success looks like for your MVP. Whether it's a certain number of users, specific user feedback, or another measurable outcome, setting these benchmarks can provide clarity and goals for the project. Acknowledge Limitations: Be transparent about what the MVP won't do. This honesty can prevent misunderstandings and set the stage for discussions on future enhancements.