“Just a Feature” to Product-Market Fit (with examples)
We all have this fear when we start out. Our MVPs are feature-poor and only serve a small segment of the entire user base.
When compared to more mature products, you might think…
“This is just a feature”
Not every feature will make it to product-market fit BUT,
I think there are some strategies that might work for turning these “features” into profitable startups.
- “Platform-for-foundation” Strategy
- “Attached-to-revenue” Strategy
- “Platform-for-distribution” Strategy
Strategies that might work
1. “Platform-for-foundation” Strategy
Adopt this strategy if
(a) you are solving latent problems for more mature user groups and,
(b) adding value to the core experience.
This strategy assumes that a user has 100 problem points (an imaginary problem scale). In order to find your solution (worth 15 problem points) valuable, the first 70 problem points need to be unlocked.
You don’t want to have to build features from 0 to 60 before someone finds you worth adopting
Attaching yourself to a platform ensures that the first 70 problem points have already been solved by the platform, rather than having to build everything yourself.
2. “Attached-to-revenue” Strategy
Something that I noticed within the Martech & Sales-tech space is that even if you were only 5% better, people will switch to you.
This advantage is not afforded to the rest. You should abuse it.
I think the main reason for this is how closely these products are tied to revenue.
In general, the mentality for these tools tend to be
- “Let’s try everything, no matter how small”
- “Stack them high”
- “Multiple tools are fine, we will stitch them together later”
If you are building a “feature” that is within this space, you should flaunt this to your advantage.
Support software or Productivity software won’t cut it if all they did was help users become just 5% more efficient.
3. “Platform-for-distribution” Strategy
In this strategy, you aren’t actually adding relevant value to the core experience on the platform but rather leveraging on the platform for distribution.
It still enhances the overall user experience of the platform, albeit in discreet ways.
Final word
Not every startup can employ these strategies
This list isn’t exhaustive. (I will keep adding to it.)
Aside from some exceptions, I don’t think “features” get turned into profitable companies that often.
This statement might cause you to overcorrect and lead you to think that you need to build out everything in order to “become a full product”.
Here is a small word of caution.
It is risky to work on every single weakness
You will inevitably work to cover some of your product gaps.
Your competitors have been in the market years ahead of you. They probably have development teams 5x bigger than yours.
Two paths:
(1) If your goal is to destroy that incumbent, trend ahead cautiously.
(2) If your goal is to make money, integrate with that incumbent and focus on improving your “feature” over time so that the incumbent can’t catch up.
In Path (1), you are chasing an incumbent to be “feature complete”.
In Path (2), the incumbent is chasing you whilst also supporting the other thousand customers they have.
Hope you enjoyed reading this 🚀
If you did, consider following me on Twitter. 👍
