Board

In some cases this isn’t possible. If it’s not, then ask yourself what is the minimum work you need to do to get to a product you can test with customers. For example, maybe you can make the algorithms work well for a narrow set of users, rather than solving the general case.

Once you know the minimum work, try to break it down into discrete steps, as many as possible. Your estimate of the time for the project will be more accurate if you evaluate each step and then add them up, rather than trying to estimate the whole thing at once. Having discrete steps with time estimates allows you to have checkpoints throughout the project so you can see if you are falling behind expectations. Tracking measurable progress frequently is the best way to stay on budget.

The latter is usually the most eye opening for founders when they finally ask themselves this honestly. Most of the time, the features asked by customers are not ones that they’d leave over if not built immediately. They’re nice to have, not need to have. When resources like time and energy are limited in a startup, knowing what not to do becomes invaluable.

Sometimes the answer is clear and it’s obvious that you must fix a critical bug over everything else. Boom, easy win. Sometimes it’s not as clear and your gut tells you that the feature no one asked for but is in your vision is the idea that will make the most impact on growth. That is where you, the founder, earn your equity. Time to make that tough decision! It may or may not work out, but at least you’re not making the decision arbitrarily. If it doesn’t work out, learn from the mistake, resort and move forward quickly.

“Several distinct problems manifest themselves as delays in launching: working too slowly; not truly understanding the problem; fear of having to deal with users; fear of being judged; working on too many different things; excessive perfectionism. Fortunately you can combat all of them by the simple expedient of forcing yourself to launch something fairly quickly.” —-Paul Graham, The 18 Mistakes that Kill Startups

Our MVP gestation time kept shrinking, from three months, to one week, to one day, down to a few hours. In the end it was our most minimal release, a single page that submitted a file and an email address to our inbox, that got us the most traction.

Sometimes our features were so ridiculously basic that as soon as we released them, everyone complained about the lack of functionality. However, this was great: We’d wasted zero effort, and quickly knew that customers wanted that feature.

The main downside to this approach is that your product will feel less mature and polished than it could. But the feedback, data, and learning you get from releasing v0 features far outweighs the minor early reputation damage you may incur.

PMs have grown to be Hydra-headed gods. One face is permanently turned back, tracking the progress of every product launched. Another looks keenly into the future, to scout opportunities for newer products. The face of the present—in most cases—is just trying to keep everything together.

Had the NPCI been a privately-held tech company, such a feature launch would never have been prioritised, he says. Simply because they would “have to do 5X the work for 5% value.”

But the more dependencies you introduce into building anything, the more you become subject to narrative. The more people who have to believe in something to make it work, the more you're dependent on their belief system.

Storytelling is something I find myself returning to think about again, and again, and again. It can be one of the most powerful forces in the universe. But it is such a double-edged sword. And if you're not careful, it can cut you down as much as it can build you up.

out expectations, which warps perception and acts a forcing function for interpretation - and that is How You Feel (in the most simplistic way possible)."

In Kyla's words, our "interpretation of the future shapes [the] narrative, which can shape reality."

In this market, every dependency you have as a business is an increasingly at-risk failure point.

The story has changed, and everyone's vibes are off. Pessimism is running rampant, and so much of building a startup is dependent on shared narratives. There are so many people that you have to convince. You have to convince them you can create something out of nothing.

a story-skeptical time, fundraising is a weakness

In times when everyone has transitioned from FOMO (fear of missing out) to SOBS (shame of being suckered), you're going to be met with a lot of intense skepticism. The more you can be in control of your own destiny, rather than at the mercy of someone else's faithfulness, the better off you'll be.

I should caveat this idea with the acknowledgement that every idea requires nuance. Venture capital isn't evil. Bootstrapping isn't the ONLY way to build a business. Everything is a tool. You can accept dependencies, but you should accept them thoughtfully

The only way he makes money is if Berkshire Hathaway stock goes up. So what are his dependencies? Effectively just the performance of his underlying businesses. If the businesses do well, he has more cash to deploy.

In a world of naysayers, sad-sops, and storytellers (who are grumpy), look for those opportunities to grow organically, rely on yourself, and build with fewer people who are more bought into the vision. Don't be afraid of dependencies, but only depend on dependencies that are dependable.

The more dependencies you introduce to your business, the more you're at the mercy of other people's narratives.