What different approaches are there to help stakeholders focus on their needs I.e. things they would use for MVP vs a later version of the product

Great question! It's easy to fall into "i'm sure a user would want to ABC and then they would XYZ . . " and expand the scope of your first iteration. The process I have found that has the most success is a couple of steps that focus the use cases being delivered to those that move the business goals forward.

1. Match a product outcome to a business outcome

   • If you have a business goal of increasing revenue product goals should ladder up to that. So new product line, driving user growth by X% or increasing upgrades by X% might be the product goals.

2. Pick a use case that delivers the product outcome.

   • Going from that product goal, what is a problem to solve or use case to deliver for customers that moves you towards the goal? If you are trying to drive more Daily Active users and find that a specific action is being taken by your power users driving a higher percentage of users to take that action could be a use case to explore.

3. User story map the use case and cut cut cut

   • Now that you have the use case you can map the customer journey through it asking questions like "what are the ways a customer would get to this step? What do they have to do before this step to get here? What will they need to complete this step?" and and then cutting until there is a minimal path through. There are excellent resources on the web about User Story Mapping that can guide you throughthisprocess.

Going through these steps may seem like a lot of work but if you are in the business of building an MVP it is important to be talking about the "why" as often if not more than the "what" and shipping the minimal "what" to get the maximum "why".

Depending on the complexity of the product being built, and the investment needed initially to get to the MVP phase, I have used several different methods - each having its merits:

1. MoSCoW Method (Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, Won't-have): Break down features into categories: Must-have for MVP, Should-have for secondary versions, Could-have for nice-to-haves, and Won’t-have for now

• Helps stakeholders see which features are truly essential for the MVP and manage expectations about what comes next

2. User Story Mapping: Create a visual map of user stories aligned with the user journey, organizing features based on the flow of usage

• Clarifies the critical path for the MVP, focusing on core features necessary to support the user journey, while identifying later features to enrich the experience.

3. Impact vs. Effort Matrix: Plot features based on their impact on the user or business Vs. the effort required to implement.

• High-impact, low-effort features become MVP candidates, while low-impact, high-effort features can be deferred to later versions. This approach balances value with feasibility.

4. Jobs to Be Done (JTBD) Framework: Focus on the specific “jobs” or tasks users need the product to accomplish.

• Helps stakeholders prioritise features for MVP that directly address users’ core needs, postponing non-essential features that don’t directly serve these jobs.

5. Value vs. Complexity Quadrant: Assess each feature for value (how it helps meet objectives) and complexity (effort to implement).

• High-value, low-complexity items are ideal for MVP, while high-complexity items can be earmarked for later versions.

6. Lean Canvas or Feature Canvas: Use a Lean Canvas or Feature Canvas to outline the problem, solution, unique value proposition, and required features.

• This structured, concise format helps identify only essential features, separating MVP from enhancements for future releases.

7. Kano Model Analysis: (Similar to MoSCoW) Classify features as basic, performance, excitement, or indifferent.

• Helps distinguish core MVP features (basic and performance) that are necessary for user satisfaction from features that delight but are not essential for MVP.

8. Rapid Prototyping and Feedback: Build quick prototypes of the proposed MVP to gather feedback from stakeholders and end-users.

• This hands-on approach allows stakeholders to experience the MVP in action and focus on high-priority features, keeping less critical ones for later, especially useful in situations where the engineering team need to evaluate challenging concepts.

Methods 3 and 5 are especially helpful when Board members / Senior leadership is trying to evaluate the merits of investing in a new area – this type of articulation helps in quickly visualising value.