SILC.
Building & Shipping

Your MVP is too big: a scoping method that actually cuts

Tristan Klement

Founder of SILC · a decade shipping products · 6 min read

In short

Every founder agrees the MVP should be minimal, right up until it's their feature on the cutting block. Here's the three-column method I use to cut 50–70% of scope without losing the point of the product.

Every founder I've worked with agrees, in principle, that an MVP should be minimal. The agreement lasts right up until it's their feature on the cutting block. Then the M in MVP quietly becomes "Marketable", then "Mature", and eventually you're nine months into a "minimum" product with a settings page.

The problem isn't discipline. It's that "minimum" has no defence attached. When someone asks "surely we need user profiles?", no needs an argument, and most scoping exercises don't produce arguments. They produce lists.

Start from the bet, not the product

An MVP exists to test exactly one bet: the riskiest assumption that, if wrong, kills the business. Not "can we build it"; you almost certainly can. Usually it's "will this specific person pay to solve this specific problem this specific way."

Write the bet down as a sentence. For a recent fintech client it was: finance teams will pay to eliminate one reconciliation step they currently do in spreadsheets. Every scoping decision for the next six weeks traced back to that sentence.

If you can't write the sentence, you're not ready to scope; you have a strategy gap, not a scoping one. That's what a product strategy sprint is for: name the bets, then come back and cut.

The three columns

Now take your feature wishlist (all forty items, be honest) and sort every one into exactly three columns:

Proves the bet. Remove this feature and the MVP can no longer test the assumption. This column is shockingly small. For the fintech it was four features.

Table stakes. The product is unusable or untrustworthy without it: auth, the billing path if you're charging (you should be), whatever your industry regulates. Be brutal here: "users expect it" is not table stakes, it's column three wearing a disguise.

Later. Everything else. Not "phase two", not "fast follow". Later, meaning after the bet is proven, re-prioritised against what you learn.

Defend the middle column

Column two is where MVPs go to die, because everything feels like table stakes to the person who suggested it. The test I apply: what actually breaks if we ship without it? Not "what looks unpolished". What breaks.

Password reset? Breaks trust with real users, so keep it. Email notifications? Nothing breaks; your first fifty users will check the dashboard. Later. Admin analytics? You have twelve customers; a spreadsheet works. Later. Native app? A responsive web app tests the same bet for a third of the cost. Later, maybe forever.

At the end of a good scoping session, the "later" column should hold 50–70% of the original list. If it holds less, you haven't scoped, you've reformatted.

Make the cut list public

The most underrated artefact of scoping isn't the roadmap. It's the explicit not-now list, signed by the founders. Written down, with the reasoning, where the whole team can see it.

This does two jobs. It stops relitigating: when the feature request comes back in week three (it will), you point at the list instead of re-arguing. And it converts scoping from a loss into a plan: stakeholders accept "later, once the bet is proven" far more gracefully than "no".

The wishlist isn't wrong. It's just not first. That's the entire discipline of MVP scoping: sequencing, defended in writing.

Tristan Klement

Founder of SILC. A decade of taking products from whiteboard to launch: agency-side across dozens of client builds, then in-house running product at a scale-up fintech.

More about SILC →

Keep reading

11 Aug 2026What an MVP actually costs in South AfricaQuotes for the same MVP range from R35,000 to R2 million, which tells you the number is meaningless without knowing what sits behind it. Here is what each band actually buys, and why the cheapest quote is usually the most expensive way to build.Building & Shipping8 min read10 Aug 2026Agency, fractional lead, or offshore team: which one you actually needThree ways to build a product, each correct in different circumstances and expensive in the wrong one. A straight comparison of what you get, what it costs, and the failure mode of each.Product Strategy7 min read01 Aug 2026Twelve customer interviews beat three months of buildingDiscovery feels slow, so teams skip it and 'learn by shipping'. Here's what shipping actually costs as a research method, and how to run interviews that produce decisions instead of quotes.Discovery & Validation6 min read

Free 30-minute intro

Ready to build the right thing?

A free 30-minute intro call: bring your product problem, leave with a straight opinion and a clear next step, whether or not that step involves me.

Book a strategy call