When a POC is treated as an MVP - and accidentally becomes an MBI

In product management, an MBI is a Minimum Business Increment: the smallest chunk of value that can be delivered to produce a measurable business outcome.

In this story, however, the acronym took on a second, unintended meaning.

What started as a Proof of Concept, promoted too quickly to MVP status, slowly transformed into something else entirely: a system that no longer delivered business increments - but instead blocked them.

A Minimum Business Increment quietly became a Mission-Blocking Infrastructure.

About the client

The client operates a fast-growing fashion marketplace with a strong entrepreneurial culture and a clear focus on execution.

In its earliest phase, the company relied on a single developer to build the initial software core. This system handled product feeds, order processing, and the operational glue needed to keep the business alive. The founders were deeply involved, continuously refining requirements as the business model evolved.

At that stage, the objective was not architectural purity.
It was speed.

Build fast.
Validate the market.
Create the first real business increment.

And that goal was achieved.

The system went live, orders started flowing, and the business proved itself. From a product-management perspective, the MVP had done its job.

The problem was not what the system did.
It was what it was never meant to become.

The problem

When an MVP is mistaken for a foundation

The original system was conceived as a Proof of Concept. Its role was to test assumptions, not to carry long-term operational weight.

Once deployed directly into production, it effectively became the Minimum Viable Product. This transition felt natural, even successful. Revenue was coming in. Operations were running.

But something subtle was overlooked.

An MVP is not a scalable core.
It is a learning tool.

As the company entered its first growth phase, new features were continuously added to the same structure. Each new requirement represented a legitimate business need—new partners, new workflows, new edge cases. Yet all of them were implemented by extending a core that had never been designed to evolve coherently.

From the outside, value was still being delivered.
Internally, complexity was compounding.

At this point, the system stopped behaving like an MVP and started resembling what, in product terms, should have been an MBI: a Minimum Business Increment. But instead of being a deliberately shaped increment aligned with strategy, it became an accidental one—delivered by stretching the same fragile structure further and further.

That is where the joke turns serious.

The “MBI” no longer represented incremental business value.
It became a Mission-Blocking Infrastructure—a system that technically worked, but strategically constrained every next move.

The solution

Restoring the meaning of “increment”

A full rewrite was considered.

It was also discarded.

A complete refactor would have required a significant upfront investment, long operational freezes, and a high risk of disrupting daily business. Replacing the engine while stopping the car was not an option.

Instead, the approach focused on reintroducing intentional increments, both technical and business-oriented.

Reframing the architecture around future MBIs

A new scalable core was designed and introduced alongside the existing system. This core was not meant to immediately replace the old one. Its role was to become the foundation for all future increments—real MBIs in the product-management sense.

Clear boundaries were defined. Ownership of data and responsibilities was made explicit. The architecture was built to evolve without destabilizing what already worked.

Redirecting value creation

From that moment on, every new functionality—every new “business increment”—was implemented exclusively on the new core. The legacy system was no longer allowed to grow.

This single rule stopped the architectural drift instantly.

Containing the past

The original core was stabilized and frozen in scope. It continued to operate, but only corrective changes were allowed. No new value was expected from it; it was no longer part of the strategic roadmap.

Migrating with intent, not ideology

Existing functionalities were evaluated based on their real business impact. Only components whose migration would unlock meaningful value or reduce significant risk were moved to the new core.

Others were deliberately left where they were.

In product terms, migration itself became a sequence of intentional MBIs, not a technical crusade.

The result

From accidental MBIs to deliberate ones

The impact was visible within months.

Technical work regained predictability. Delivery discussions shifted from “what might break” to “what value comes next.” Most importantly, the system stopped redefining strategy through its limitations.

Key performance indicators

The company returned to delivering real MBIs—increments designed to serve the business, not negotiated with the codebase.

Closing insight

A POC is allowed to be fragile.
An MVP is allowed to be imperfect.
An MBI, however, must be intentional.

When increments are delivered accidentally—by stretching systems beyond their nature—they stop being increments and start becoming obstacles.

Sometimes, the most dangerous MBI is the one that delivers value just long enough to convince everyone it can keep doing so forever.

The cure is not a heroic rewrite.
It is restoring meaning to evolution—one deliberate increment at a time.