The ethos of MVP has quietly seeped into almost every corner of modern business, and not always with favourable outcomes.

At the risk of upsetting some colleagues from my network in the tech and development field, here’s a view on the wider impact of Minimum Viable Product (MVP) – the mantra of rapid technology development. In truth, this is not aimed at them or even the tech sector in general, but rather an observation that the ethos of MVP has quietly seeped into almost every corner of modern business, and not always with favourable outcomes.

Over the last decade, functions outside of technology and IT have been eager to adopt the processes of the tech world: agile workflows, sprint cycles, MVP thinking. The appeal is obvious. Speed to market, rapid iteration, and the ability to test and learn quickly are powerful advantages in an increasingly competitive environment. For many organisations, embracing these approaches has been positioned as a badge of innovation—a signal that they are evolving with the times.

But there’s a difference between adopting a methodology and adopting a mindset without context.

In too many cases, MVP has drifted from its original purpose—learning quickly and improving continuously—into something far less disciplined. It has become shorthand for “good enough.” Or worse, “it will do.” What was once a strategic approach to managing uncertainty now risks becoming an excuse for underinvestment in quality.

This shift is particularly visible in areas like marketing, customer experience, and service delivery—functions where perception, consistency, and emotional engagement are critical. Unlike software, where bugs can be patched and features iterated, customer impressions are far less forgiving. A poor experience is not a beta test; it’s a broken promise.

Research from PwC has consistently shown that a significant majority of consumers will walk away from a brand they love after just a few bad experiences. Similarly, Gartner has highlighted that customer experience is now one of the primary drivers of competitive differentiation. Yet, paradoxically, many businesses appear to be deprioritising the very elements that create those experiences.

The result? A creeping commoditisation.

When every brand operates with the same “fast and cheap” mentality, differentiation erodes. Service becomes inconsistent. Marketing becomes formulaic. Customer journeys feel transactional rather than intentional. Even historically premium brands risk blending into a sea of sameness, where price and availability become the only meaningful levers.

You can already see this in industries like retail, airlines and automotive. In the UK car market, the influx of new entrants has intensified competition and accelerated product parity. Without a compelling ownership experience or service proposition, even established premium brands risk losing their edge.

For niche and premium businesses, this should be a warning sign. Competing on product specification or price alone is rarely sustainable. The real battleground lies in the intangible: trust, service, experience, and brand perception. These are not areas where “minimum viable” thinking thrives.

The uncomfortable question, then, is whether businesses have misunderstood MVP entirely. It was never meant to lower standards—it was meant to sharpen focus. Somewhere along the way, that nuance has been lost.

If “it will do” becomes the default operating model, the long-term consequence is clear: a race to the bottom. And in that race, nobody really wins.

Author: Neil Burrows, May 2026