Should we outsource product development for our MVP?

Outsourcing an MVP works brilliantly if the agency operates on fixed outcomes, not hourly billing. The mistake most founders make is picking a team that quotes months; a well-structured AI-augmented squad can ship a working, testable MVP in 4 weeks. We've run this model for several early-stage startups: define the core user journey, scope ruthlessly, and ship. The iteration speed post-launch is what really separates the good partners from the average ones. DM me if you want to talk through what a tight scope looks like for your idea.

Quality and speed I would say are the main pros on the outsourcing process. BUT BE CAREFUL with the cons. I work for a US based software design and development firm, one of our programs specializes in MVP building. Here I list some of the main bad things I've seen in our "rescue" projects, since partners did not use the right foot first in the outsourcing move.

1- Getting ripped off: aah the classic, and this is the most common, first time founders as soon as they have a bit of funding they go looking for freelance south east asian devs that promise a 30 day delivery and a unique payment of $4k for a fully functional MVP too good to be true right? Well, it is, that's a rip off 95% of the time (the other 5% are the true professional Indian, Pakistani and Filipino devs that are hidden gems, I've worked with many of them in the past, but usually those guys take real, serious and high paying contracts, not out on the freelance world).

2- Little to no visibility/transparency: Unless you work with a legally established company, you can sign as many NDAs and Time contracts as you want, but there's ALWAYS something going in the back that you do not see, and guess what? Most of the time you cannot do anything about it. That's why working with legal partners that you can actually sue if something goes south is a step that I would truly recommend.

3- Poor PoC or no validation: PMF, Market research and internal validation most of the time will show that the idea will work (For the owners, because they love it, and for the devs, because they want the owners money no matter the final outcome, they do not care if the project works or not). Therefore, development starts without a true validation. That's why having actual professionals validating your concept with proved methodology and proper studies is a must.

So, in regards to Outsourcing. avoiding those 3 mistakes, is how you get something tangible and interactive to show investors, without feeling like you have taken a leap of faith developing it.

To emphasize a bit on examples, we delivered this MVPs this week (with a record deadline):

• WeClose

Case Study: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oW4D50Y8k084WWZzZiIXS4Ej6l7GnmKB/view

Product Validation Sprint: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EHv-9wrbnlbPfLdKmbDfOHyZsT4ZTj6C/view

• SmallChange

Case Study: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xh2-WmQmwaPbWQLP7t6IumJGNsr-miYu/view

Product Validation Sprint: https://drive.google.com/file/d/14XjABS7UAZzHbHucyYsAQLKnQhsxSmN-/view

And although we handled everything in the MVP from the owner saying "hey, I have an idea" to the final delivery, the owners did not spend a ridiculous amount of money on this, we all know that we are in an era where technology is the premier deflationary force in the market, digital goods and services are less expensive to develop than ever.

Here's our website if you like to know more and see more success cases/testimonials --> https://istsimulator.io/

Happy to know more about you and your venture :) hit me up on LinkedIn or email me to have chat, we're all busy, but I'm sure we can find some free time.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/ammar-naser-7bb929181/
[email protected]

Typically I advice to outsource product design development, but keep the dev phase inhouse, especially if you are writing proprietary code from the beginning.

In general, if you out source your early product you will have to have it rewritten at some point in the future.

They will hit those deadlines... but they will cut every corner they possibly can and not life a single finger more than they need to do so.

It's a great way to get something out the door, but it's not great if you have a product that eventually needs to move quick and be stable.

So if you are willing to commit to basically rebuilding it once you get funding or traction, then yes.

Aside: if you current developer isn't taking things are seriously as you need him/her to then cut it. There are plenty of folks out there that would work stupidly hard for a huge chunk of ownership.

CTOs don't code. Get a fractional CTO on very part-time basis to get your technology strategy in order (and maybe even get your current dev to deliver, maybe your idea sucks and is hard to implement but he can't communicate that?)

UPDATE : Thanks a lot guys for your answers. Got so many great answers. Appreciate you all.
To be honest, we're gonna have a chat with him first and see how things play out. On one hand, we don't want to sacrifice quality for speed. But on the flip side, someone who keeps coming up with excuses isn't fostering a great work vibe. And that's not cool for a startup in its early days, especially when I'm working hard to bring in clients. If we can't meet deadlines, it's gonna mess with the trust people have in joining our trial!

A company isn't just started. It's a serious of goals achieved just to get to the starting line. It seems like you're experiencing the difference between saying that you are starting something, and actually starting something.

Especially at the beginning you need to be a little ruthless to accomplish goals. I would set a goal to do whatever it takes to get an MVP product built. If you cannot build it yourself there will generally be a lot of stops and starts to get a project built. It will generally take way longer and be much more expensive than you think. Pushing through all of this is the hard part.

I've been in similar situations - 1) brought on "co-founders" that always sloughed off, 2) learned to code and built projects myself, 3) Hired devs on Upwork and Fiverr.

All options have positives and negatives. It's all about getting to the next step, evaluating and making new decisions.

BTW, what are you working on while waiting for the developers? That's always a big question for me.

There is nothing wrong in hiring an external team to get the MVP done, if that helps you get to your goals faster. Obviously there is a tradeoff and you'll need to make sure to communicate regularly and in a detailed manner to get your requirements through. I've learned that overcommunication is the key using multiple modes (calls, docs, instant messages)
Finally, keep yourself aware of what tools are being used, where the code is, where the deployment is being done (ideally be an owner of the repos and the accounts yourself). Don't forget to get the code handoff and knowledge transfer (hopefully you have a CTO/dev for this) at the end.
I did the same for my landing page and MVP for getkudos.io. I'd be happy to recommend the team. They're at stacktically.com (full disclosure: I am an unpaid mentor/advisor to the group)

Absolutely, outsourcing can be a viable route for MVP development, especially when faced with internal team challenges.

Pros:

• Speed: You can quickly tap into established expertise and resources.
• Flexibility: It's easier to scale up or down based on needs.
• Cost-Effective: Often cheaper in the short term than hiring full-time.

Cons:

• Less Control: Outsourcing may reduce your direct oversight and control.
• Quality Variance: The output depends largely on your chosen partner.
• Knowledge Transfer: Eventually, transitioning from an outsourced team to an in-house one might require a knowledge handover phase.

In the interim, it could be the right move to gain traction. Just ensure clear communication and set expectations.

If the development requirements are clearly articulated step-by-step, screen-by-screen, I believe it would be beneficial to outsource module development to tools like Chat GPT or Github Copilot, then you can then focus on integrating these modules and adjusting the visual aspects using tools like Tailwind.

What is most no 1 things most important thing if you are starting is having the speed. In fact that what make startup better than big companies. SPEED.

So the decision to outsource or not is depend on the speed. Which one is faster to build and iterate.

MVP is build to be deployed fast and iterated very quickly else what the point of MVP. So if you think outsourcing can help you achieve that than that's good. But If you outsource to other companies you need to remember that your project is not the priority. They might have some other things to build, so you cannot iterate as much as you think.

You cant simply think of an adjustment and have the changes by tomorrow morning. You need to wait for the deal to go through etc.

So my suggestion is which ever decision that can bring speed than it is what you should focus. You can checkout this article about how much impact speed can bring to a startup Start with no speed is useless

I've spent a lot of time in projects with contractors and it's never really the same as having that in-house team.

I don't think you're problem of hitting deadlines would be resolved by getting a contractor, in fact, it could get worse as it's quite a common theme.

The whole mindset is completely different for a contractor. They are literally just there for my money whereas an internal team has at least some buy-in to the vision.

I would have a conversation with your engineer and try to see how you might be able to do things differently to hit deadlines rather than going for contractors.

Hope that helps!

IMO, Never outsource the code, if ever you decide to bring it inhouse it's going to be such a mess. Also, you have so little control of the code/features that way..

Until you have a proven product, even if it's shit product, don't outsource :(

Hey Rayan! Sounds like you ran into some challenges. I run a design & dev agency and this is our offer: We deliver a working MVP within the agreed timeframe or you don't pay!

I'd be open to give you advise on how to approach looking for and hiring dev talent (even if that person is not us of course). Get in touch with me:
https://calendly.com/verdi-appshine/30min

Hello, @RayanS! Using outside help can be a good idea. However, I've also seen many teams facing similar problems who fixed things by making their way of working better. In the last three years, I've assisted two teams that were struggling with meeting their deadlines and having software issues. We made small changes to how they worked, and they started finishing their work on time.

If you're interested, you can send me a message with how your team works right now and some information about the team itself. Here's what I'll do:

1. Review your process.
2. Come up with some ideas to improve it.
3. Set aside an hour to talk with you about the suggestions and answer any questions you have.

All this at no cost to you.

I think outsourcing can have huge value early on. I'd also consider no code tools, having said that, a lot of small companies contact me desperate to get away from no code tools. So plan for that too.

Pros:

Cost Savings
Expertise
Faster Development
Scalability

Outsourcing frees up your internal team to focus on core business functions rather than getting sidetracked by development tasks.

Cons:

Communication Challenges
Dependency
Less Control
Data Security
Cultural Differences

It is also worth considering just how complex an initial MVP needs to be, more often that not people over complicate this step, rather than truly focusing on validating their idea.

Because MVP's are very fluid. I always use these options until the idea is validated:

1. Get a full stack developer as a part of the team who can quickly build things up.
2. Use no code tools like Wix or Bubble. Now with Wix velo you can build a fullstack SaaS app.

Hi, Rayan. Nice to meet you. We offer small dev teams to early stage startups to build and launch their MVPs for a flat monthly fee. I think our pricing structure can benefit your early stage startup to launch your MVP quickly. Would you be interested in a discovery call to understand if we are a match?

Is the full stack dev a co-founder?
Why is he not meeting deadlines?
Are you just creating the deadlines from thin air (i'm a little biased towards devs)?

Hiring more devs will actually slow you down in the short term.