I’ve started to see MVP development less as a speed exercise and more as a test of technical discipline. Too many founders believe that stripping features is enough. It’s not. Without the right technical guidance, even a "small" product can be structured poorly, built on weak assumptions, or designed in a way that creates expensive problems later. The early technical decisions such as architecture, scope control, validation flow quietly shape everything that follows.

For me, the real value of an MVP lies in how intelligently it’s executed. Strong technical direction keeps the focus on validating the core problem, not adding surface-level features. It ensures you build only what’s necessary to test demand, while preserving capital and flexibility. That’s what makes an MVP powerful — not minimalism for its own sake, but clarity, feedback-driven learning, and disciplined execution from day one.

I recently read an excellent article which fully explores everything about MVP Development. I strongly recommend it to all the readers and especially startup founders. To know more:

https://startups-blog.blogspot.com/2026/02/how-to-develop-mvp-with-technical.html