The document discusses product lifecycles and portfolios, from developing minimum viable products (MVPs) to maximum awesome products (MAPs). It presents a model showing how products should start with adaptive and shaping prototypes validated with early adopters, before becoming MVPs. As problem-solution and product-market fit are achieved, the MVP can be enhanced to cross the "chasm" and become a pilot product. Attention can then turn to a total product solution or MAP. The document compares Apple and Google's approaches, and discusses how the model can be used to generate MVPs based on existing "red ocean" products by applying "blue ocean" strategies like eliminating, reducing, increasing or creating elements.

1.
Product
Lifecycle
&
Portfolio:
From
Minimum
Viable
Product
(MVP)
to
Maximum
Awesome
Product
(MAP)
By
Dr.
Rod
King
(rodkuhnhking@gmail.com
&
@rodkuhnking)
***
“Most innovative products fail because they are “inappropriate.” Rod King
***
It is often stated that a large majority of "innovative" products fail to generate
adequate return on investment. Some pundits put the rate of failure of new
product launches as high as 90%. Irrespective of the percentage, the truth is that
the majority of new products fail in the market. Why?
The answer, according to recent observations and research, lies in developing
an "inappropriate" product: developing and launching a full-scale product in an
unpredictable environment and unvalidated market. In short, developing an
innovative product for a "phantom" or wrong customer segment. Waterfall
product planning is usually blamed as the culprit and driver of producing
"inappropriate" or failed innovative products.
The lifecycle diagram below visually summarizes how the problem of
mismatching products to an environment can systematically be solved. According
to the diagram, a product should be developed starting with an Adaptive
(Pretotype) Product and Shaping (Prototype) Product for "Earlyvangelists"
and "Early Adopters" respectively while the organization exists as a startup. The
first goal is to obtain Problem-Solution Fit, that is, to validate that the product idea
or pretotype strongly resonates with people that have the type of problem that the
product resolves. As they say, make sure that there are customers with serious
"itches" that your product can effectively "scratch" while relieving pain.

2. As Problem-Solution Fit and Product-Market Fit are obtained, the Minimum
Viable Prototype Product is enhanced - and if successfully managed -
approaches and crosses what Geoffrey Moore calls the "chasm." Next,
a pilot product or platform can start to be built. The proximate goal is to achieve
business model fit, profitability, and scaling. Thereafter, attention can be focused
on building a total product solution or Maximum Awesome Product (MAP).
Apple routinely follows the pattern illustrated in the Product Lifecycle and
Portfolio diagram as can be seen in the development of devices such as the
iPod, iPhone, and iPad. In Apple's case, the Adaptive (Pretotype) and Shaping
(Prototype) Products are validated especially within the organization using
selected "Earlyvangelists" and "Early Adopters." Consequently, products in the
phase of "Apple-startup" is hidden from the view of the public. What is usually
launched to the public are minimum viable pilots of their innovative products.

3. Perhaps, the invisible genius of Steve Jobs was to organize an ecosystem of
players to accelerate the jump over the chasm. This approach involves direct
and indirect mass persuasion, both of which Steve Jobs mastered in his role as
CEO of a large company; startups simply do not have such resources. Whereas
Steve Jobs minimized risks in launching innovative products, startups maximize
risks in investing huge sums of money, time, and other resources to cross the
chasm as well as maintain momentum.
Google's approach to the release of products contrasts Apple's approach.
Often, Google exposes its prototype and pilot projects to the public. What do you
think of the effectiveness as well as success of Google vs. Apple's approach?
The Product Lifecycle & Portfolio diagram can be used in many and different
ways. A novel use of the diagram is to generate ideas, scenarios, and/or
Minimum Viable Products (MVP) that are based on taking a Red Ocean
(matured) product or business model while applying the four ("ERIC") actions of
Blue Ocean Strategy: Eliminate; Reduce; Increase; Create. This process
involves "Reverse Thinking" from Maximum Awesome Product (MAP) to
Minimum Viable Product (MVP). The diagram below visually provides some hints
on applying the ERIC actions to a Red Ocean product and business model with a
view to obtaining a Blue Ocean product and business model that can be tested
and validated.

4. Historically, the above diagram can be used to explain the Blue Ocean Strategy
of startups that disrupted incumbents or Red Ocean companies. Examples of
such creation of blue oceans or disruptive innovations include the following:
• Cirque du Soleil vs. Ringling Bros. Circus
• Southwest Airlines vs. Traditional (Long Haul) Airlines
• iPod vs. Walkman
• Netflix vs. Blockbuster
• iPhone vs. Blackberry Smartphone
The Product Lifecycle & Portofolio diagram below illustrates the Blue Ocean
Strategy of Cirque du Soleil which created a Blue Ocean in the circus
entertainment industry. A word of caution: the diagram below is dense and
requires some patience to unravel the dynamics of how Cirque du Soleil

5. organically developed and deployed a Blue Ocean Strategy while intuitively using
some principles of the Lean Startup Method.
What do you think?
P.S.: The Product Lifecycle & Portfolio diagram also indicates that for a product-
driven organization to survive in today's dynamic environment, the organization
must be ambidextrous. the organization must have a portfolio that consists of two
"wings:" Maximum Awesome Products (MAP) on the wing of stability
(improvement) and Minimum Viable Products (MVP) on the wing of
innovation.
Rod King (rodkuhnhking@gmail.com)
June 20, 2015