Let’s be honest. The word “viable” sounds a bit… clinical. It gets the job done, sure. But does it spark joy? In today’s crowded digital marketplace, where users abandon apps in seconds, being merely viable might be the fast track to obscurity. That’s why a new contender has entered the ring: the Minimum Lovable Product (MLP).

So, what’s the real deal here? Is it just a fancy rebrand of the good old MVP? Or a fundamental shift in how we think about early product development? Well, let’s dive in. We’ll unpack both approaches, figure out when to use which, and talk about how to validate them—without losing your shirt or your sanity.

The Core Philosophy: Viability vs. Lovability

First, we need to get our definitions straight. These aren’t just acronyms; they represent different starting points for your product journey.

Minimum Viable Product (MVP): The Classic Test

Coined by Eric Ries in the Lean Startup methodology, the MVP is about learning. It’s the simplest version of your product that can be released to gather validated learning about customers with the least effort. The goal? Test a core hypothesis. Usually, it’s: “Do people want this?”

Think of it like a basic campfire. It provides heat, you can cook on it, it serves its core function. It’s viable. But it’s not exactly the cozy, marshmallow-roasting, story-sharing experience you remember from summer camp.

Minimum Lovable Product (MLP): The Emotional Connection

The MLP, on the other hand, asks a different question: “Will people love this?” It focuses on delivering a delightful, emotionally resonant experience from the very first interaction. It’s not about more features; it’s about a higher quality of execution on a few key features.

That campfire? Now it’s got perfectly arranged seating, a little grate for your sausages, and someone’s playing a guitar. It fulfills the same basic need, but the experience is memorable. It’s lovable.

The Development Mindset: Building Two Different Beasts

How you build these things differs—a lot. It’s not just a matter of spending more time on the MLP. It’s about where you direct your energy.

An MVP development process is often inward-looking. You’re paring down to the absolute essentials. You might use basic UI kits, tolerate minor bugs if they don’t block the core flow, and prioritize backend logic over polish. The mantra is “ship, learn, iterate.”

Developing an MLP, however, requires a ruthless focus on the user’s first 30 seconds. You obsess over:

• Onboarding: Is it frictionless, even joyful?
• Micro-interactions: Does that button press feel satisfying?
• Copywriting: Does the tone match your brand and resonate?
• Visual Design: Is it not just usable, but pleasurable to look at?

You’re engineering an emotional response. That takes a different kind of effort.

Validation: Measuring Love vs. Measuring Function

Here’s where the rubber meets the road. How do you know if you’ve succeeded? The metrics you track tell the whole story.

Validating an MVP

You’re looking for signals of viability. Key metrics are often quantitative and action-oriented:

• Conversion Rate: Did users sign up or complete the core action?
• Activation Rate: Did they experience the core value?
• Retention (early): Do they come back a second time?
• Qualitative Feedback: “Did you understand what this does?” “What blocked you?”

Success is proving or disproving your hypothesis. A “successful” MVP might still be clunky and ugly—but it proved people need the solution.

Validating an MLP

For an MLP, you need to measure emotion. This gets squishier, but it’s crucial. You’ll mix quantitative and deep qualitative data:

• Net Promoter Score (NPS): Would users recommend this to a friend? This is a classic love metric.
• Emotional Reaction: Use tools like video session replays to see users’ smiles, hear their “oh, cool!” moments.
• Organic Word-of-Mouth: Are people sharing it unsolicited? Check social mentions, referral traffic.
• Engagement Depth: Not just if they return, but how long they stay engaged in a session.

The key question in validation interviews shifts from “Could you use this?” to “How did this feel?” or “What would you tell your coworker about it?”

So, Which One Should You Choose? (It’s Not Either/Or)

This isn’t a holy war. Honestly, it’s about context. Here’s a simple way to think about it.

Lean towards an MVP when:

• You’re in a completely new, unproven market.
• The technical risk is high (you’re not sure if you can even build the core tech).
• Your primary risk is building something nobody wants.
• You have limited resources and need to learn fast.

Lean towards an MLP when:

• You’re entering a crowded, competitive space (think B2C SaaS, lifestyle apps).
• The core problem is already solved—your differentiator is the experience.
• Your primary risk is being ignored in a noisy market.
• Virality and word-of-mouth are critical to your growth model.

In fact, you know what? Many successful products follow a path from MVP to MLP. They use the MVP to validate the painful problem and then pour heart into evolving that viable core into something lovable. The MVP is the skeleton; the MLP is the personality, the smile, the charm.

The Human Takeaway: It’s About Respect

At its heart, the shift from MVP to MLP is a shift in how we view our users. The MVP approach, for all its brilliance, can sometimes treat users as data points—validators of a hypothesis. The MLP approach starts from a place of empathy. It assumes users are human beings with emotions, short attention spans, and a deep desire for things that bring them joy, not just utility.

In a world saturated with functional software, the emotional layer isn’t a nice-to-have. It’s the battleground. Developing and validating for lovability means listening for the unspoken feedback—the sigh of frustration or the moment of delight—and recognizing that those are the metrics that truly predict longevity.

Maybe it’s not about choosing one over the other. Maybe it’s about asking, from day one: “What’s the smallest thing we can build that someone might truly love?” Even if you start with viable, keep your eyes on lovable. Because in the end, people don’t commit to features. They commit to feelings.