Having a massive project to deliver in record time certainly tests my blogging discipline! Managing multiple web agencies to deliver a new corporate website, combined with an ambitious home extension project, means I have little room in my life (and brain) for much else.

So it's a good job that we're only delivering an Minimum Viable Product (MVP) on website launch. That should make the pre-launch much less intense right? Well, only if we're clear about what this actually means...

When done properly a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) is a great way of building user-centric digital services in a fraction of the time. The idea is to get something basic to market (i.e the shell of a website) as soon as possible and to start testing. You can then use all of the feedback gathered to continue to develop it long into the future.

The classic analogy here is that of a skateboard as a precursor to a Ferrari. It's basic but perfectly usable and It lowers the cost of development because you only build what people will use. The ultimate goal being that this leads to a more desirable product because it gives people exactly what they need. As developers we don’t end up paying for features that just clutter the experience.

But the danger when commissioning an MVP is that despite saying this is what we want what we actually expect is a fully blown, fully featured, PHAT website. Essentially we're only calling it an MVP because we're trying to get it developed in the shortest possible time at a low-cost.

Our users will NOT be happy with a skateboard while expecting Customer Experience provided by a red Italian convertible.

"Perhaps a better term is Minimum Lovable Product. A bicycle is a lovable and useful product for somebody with no better means of transport, but is still very far from the motorcycle that it will evolve into" - Henrik Kniberg in “How Spotify builds products

Users have to love it but time-to-market or time-to-value have to also be short. And of course our MVP has to be cheap. Can it be done? Can we develop a great quality product in a very short time at a low budget?

This is not an easy ask and those familiar with the project management triangle will know that something has to give. This pits time, cost and scope against each other and states that you have to pick two of the three. So what do we sacrifice? Buy ourselves more time? Increase the cost? Or reduce the scope?

So this brings this post up to date as to where we're at with our MVP website project. Negotiating our project scope to optimize product budget, timeline and quality. Of course, this requires a lot of heated discussion and healthy debate. But so has every successful project I've ever worked on! MVP is just the first milestone of the long journey.

Whilst on the subject of successful projects, we spent this Wednesday evening at the Drum Marketing Awards in London. This was the to be the first appearance of our 'Shaping Your World' campaign on such a grand stage. Whilst I had attended the CIM awards a few years ago just being shortlisted in the same category as Spotify and Dropbox was a massive achievement for us.

This meant I was even more nervous than usual and even though we didn't bring home the trophy I found it a great networking opportunity. We were sat next to the fellow marketers from LADbible and the BBC and made sure we gave each other lots of support.

This won't be the last high-profile event where we'll be representing either with lots on the horizon. Before we can draw breath we'll be off to the CIPR Excellence awards this Wednesday. Time for me to up my sleep game and start getting to bed at a reasonable hour in preparation...
Since publishing my last post on content strategy I saw this great opinion piece in The Drum. It argues that 'content' as a term is actually absurdly vague. It's use in a digital context is originated by website programmers as a term to describe the stuff that wasn't code.

As a quick shorthand term it has now snowballed and is used for pretty much everything we produce. Recording a video is content, taking a photo is content and even writing an email is content. I wholly agree with this argument that content as a term is far too generic and doesn't suggest that it is much fun to create let alone consume. Who wants to read some 'content' to their child at bedtime?!

When I used to work in a library I remember it being re-branded the Learning Resource Centre (LRC). This was to denote that it held more than books but it didn't stop everyone still calling it the library, as that's what it was...

It always works better when we call things what the actually are. It's time to start being specific again and talking about 'website copy', 'social media infographics' or 'short videos'. Content as a term does not do justice to the effort that goes in to creating the copy and imagery required for a new website. I wonder if I'll be brave enough to address this point at the 'Content Strategy Masterclass' which I'll be attending this week at the Design Museum?!

This argument opens up some other big issues for me with the jargon used in digital marketing. Most industries have people who look to impress by using the latest pretentious jargon - and if it doesn't exist already then they invent it! I've seen lots of examples at work of people using jargon or acronyms to try to look intellectually superior to others. There is no shame at all in asking what an acronym means.

The worst, and most prevalent, buzz phrase for me is 'thought leadership'. It's also become too broad a brushstroke for people who share their thoughts about trends and breakthroughs in their field, with a view to position themselves as authorities on a subject. It seems that many people are striving to be 'thought leaders' when only a handful of people on the planet can truly claim to have completely original ideas. After all there's a very good argument that original ideas and thought are a thing of the past and everything is a remix anyway.

In writing this blog the most I would say about myself is that I am a committed custodian of ideas, innovation, thinking and sharing. Even that sounds a bit like overstating it when I'm just trying to honestly share some anecdotes and real-life experiences from working in digital.

In my job I frequently switch between either an unhealthy overwhelming self belief or the feeling that I'm an impostor who is going to get found out! There's a chance the latter is true but the self-respecting part of me wants to challenge that notion.

As with most of us, when I get stuck on a task or am looking for recommendations for tools/resources/strategies/solutions, I often ask my network for help. This usually works and I get lots of really useful help but some come with the disappointing prefix of one word 'Just...'

Just use this software/platform/toolkit/methodology…”

“Just” makes me feel like an imposter. “Just” presumes I come from a specific background, studied certain courses in university, am fluent in certain technologies, and have read all the right books, articles, and resources. “Just” is a dangerous word.

My wife regularly uses it when explaining her profession - 'I'm just a stay at home Mum'. I tell her off for this all the time as it massively underplays the work she does. She works longer hours and a lot harder than me!

The amount of available knowledge in our field (or any field really) is growing larger and more complex all the time. That everyone has accessed the same fundamental knowledge on any topic is becoming less and less probable. We have to be careful not to make too many assumptions and undermine people who have a real willingness to learn. There are some great resources out there to help.
Next PostNewer Posts Previous PostOlder Posts Home