In the world of product development and innovation, we often hear about the importance of rapid prototyping, failing fast, and learning quickly. This approach is especially crucial during the discovery phase of a project. The concept of a Minimal Viable Product (MVP) has been a cornerstone of this philosophy, emphasizing the idea that you don't need to create and test an entire product, but rather focus on a crucial component.

Testing elements or the whole? However, a recent debate within my team and at home has made me question whether we're taking this approach too far. Are we oversimplifying things or testing too many small elements without considering the bigger picture?

Learning from Lightyear cars A conversation with Lex Hoefsloot, the founder of Lightyear, shed some interesting light on this dilemma. Lightyear is developing a car that runs on solar energy, and Lex shared how their journey involved constantly inventing new things. Through iterative testing, they arrived at the revolutionary idea of having a motor in each wheel instead of a single central motor. This decision had a cascading effect, requiring changes to the solar panels, paint, car shape, brakes, tires, and even the method of charging along the road.

A Minimal Viable System to prototype dynamics This example illustrates that sometimes, step-by-step improvements aren't enough. You need to consider the entire system and how each component interacts with others. This realization led us to coin a new term: MVS or Minimal Viable System.

An MVS is the smallest possible variant of all interactions and layers within a system. Instead of prototyping a single element, you're testing the dynamics of the whole. This approach allows you to see how different components work together and influence each other, providing a more holistic view of your product or service.

Reflecting on our own practices, I realized that our complex and multifaceted Prototype Day is actually an example of MVS in action. We're not testing individual components in isolation; we're examining the dynamics of the entire system.

This shift in perspective from MVP to MVS can be particularly valuable when dealing with complex products or services where the interplay between different elements is crucial. It allows us to identify potential issues or opportunities that might be missed when focusing on individual components.

However, it's important to note that MVS doesn't replace MVP – both have their place in the prototyping toolkit. The key is knowing when to use each approach. For simpler products or when testing specific features, an MVP might be more appropriate. For complex systems with many interdependencies, an MVS could provide more valuable insights.

The Lightyear car development required a complete new systems rethinking way of what a car is about. From 3D printing, new materials, components and moving from one to four engines to make it ever more efficient.