 "More preparation better product: a case for minimum viable technology")
Technology teams can be the biggest asset or worst bottleneck for a growing company depending on their strategy. In the name of future proofing engineering, technology teams become a hurdle to a company’s goals. You can see the hidden frustration in Bezos words below:
When the task is to build a bike, the product and technology teams tend to plan for a product which can run on motor, seat four people, sail the seas, and even fly in the future.
The evolution of the MVP philosophy
The philosophy of the minimum viable product (MVP) evolved to avoid this unnecessary over-thinking and over-preparation, which plagued all companies.
However, no such philosophy evolved for technology. Therefore, the decades-old defensive and paranoid philosophy still prevails.
The fundamental problem is that the engineers blindly copy large company strategies, considering them to be the standard. Corporates and start-ups differ widely in their needs relating to scale, brand, speed, a feature’s impact, and losses from bugs.
Minimum viable technology (MVT)
The solution to the above problems is to build the minimum technology that makes the product and its foreseeable iterations viable.
Principles of MVT
MVP is for product scope minimisation. MVT is for technology scope minimisation. Agile is for iterative technology execution.
Fast and cost effective
Build the minimum technology that makes the product and their foreseeable iterations viable. Prefer operational familiarity while choosing technology. Don’t fall for the latest buzzword.
Refactoring is part of the success plan
Getting to refactor is a sign of success. Only components which are used and evolve fast become complex over time and need to be refactored. Be ready to refactor or throw away and rebuild where justified.
This is an excerpt from Tech in Asia. You can read the full article here
