Minimum Awesome Product
Ship fast, but not naked: an MVP needs one awesome thing and a visible vision, not just adequacy.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~months to results
- Steps
- 3
- Confidence
- 83%
A correction to both 'ship the barest MVP' and 'polish forever': get to market fast, but make sure the early release has at least one genuinely awesome element and communicates a vision users can believe in. Use it when deciding how much to build before launching.
Origin
Field admitted Figma took far too long to ship (2012 start, first revenue 2017) and warned founders to get to market faster, but coupled it with the lesson that an MVP still needs something a little awesome and a communicable vision, not just table stakes.
Core principles
- 01Good enough is no longer enough; mediocre products lose.
- 02Don't sweat every detail forever, but don't ship something naked either.
- 03Users must be able to see the vision of where you're going from an early release.
- 04Include at least one awesome element that signals why this is exciting.
How to run it
- 1
Set a fast market date
Commit to getting to market quickly; perfectionism that delays shipping for years is the failure mode to avoid.
Watch out Figma waited roughly five years to first revenue; Field's explicit advice is don't do that.
- 2
Pick one awesome thing
Ensure the early release has at least one element that is genuinely awesome, not just functional, so it isn't merely an adequate MVP.
Pro tip For FigJam that awesome thing was deliberately making it fun, chosen as a differentiator under time pressure.
- 3
Make the vision visible
Give users something that communicates where the product is going so they can believe in it even at an early stage.
Watch out Don't over-index on table stakes alone; a product that is all fundamentals and no excitement gives users nothing to believe in.
In the wild
About a month before launch, FigJam worked but felt soulless. Under time pressure Figma decided to differentiate by making it fun, running a design sprint that produced ~20 ideas in a day, a few of which (like cursor chat) became definitional.
→ A once-boring product got a distinctive, believable identity and, in hindsight, it was clearly the right call.
Common mistakes
Sweating every detail and never shipping
Perfectionism that delays launch for years (as Figma did) costs far more than shipping earlier with a rough but awesome release.
Shipping a naked MVP with no soul
An MVP that is merely adequate, with no awesome element or visible vision, gives users nothing exciting to believe in.
Is it for you?
Best for
Founders deciding how much to build before launch who are tempted toward either extreme (bare MVP or endless polish).
Not ideal for
Contexts where a raw functional prototype genuinely suffices and 'awesome' would be wasted effort (some internal tools).
From the transcript
“I think it's not enough to have the MVP. You got to have something that's a little bit awesome at least.”
“The lesson is you just got to get something that you can that you can have that people can see the vision of where you're…”
“don't do what we did. Get to market faster. I wish we had.”
From the episode
Figma’s CEO: Why AI makes design, craft, and quality the new moat for startups
Dylan Field