Build, Test, Rethink, Repeat

Sign in to use AI Summary.

In startups, the greatest threat isn’t bad code. It’s confidence.

Not the good kind—the dangerous kind. The kind that comes after building a few things that worked. The kind that convinces you that your “process” is bulletproof. That you’ve found the playbook. That you can skip the basics.

Until the market humbles you.

The Silent Killer: Skipping the Boring Work

Let’s be honest: testing, experimenting, and iterating don’t sound sexy.

They’re slow. They’re uncomfortable. They make you feel like you don’t know what you’re doing.

But here’s the irony: that discomfort is the process. It’s the discipline that separates good ideas from real businesses.

“Startups don’t fail because they couldn’t build. They fail because they built the wrong thing.” — Eric Ries

Yet across Africa’s growing tech landscape—from Lagos to Nairobi to Accra—we keep repeating the same mistake: we rush to ship, but skip the steps that actually build conviction.

Testing, Experimenting, and Iterating Are Not the Same

Let’s break it down:

• Testing is asking, “Does this thing work?”

• Experimenting is asking, “What’s the best way this could work?”

• Iterating is asking, “How can we improve what’s already working?”

All three are necessary. But most early-stage teams conflate them—or worse, avoid them entirely.

Here’s what it looks like in practice:

• You conduct 5 user interviews, pick the answers that confirm your hypothesis, and move on.

• You label your solution “validated” because two friends said they’d use it.

• You skip pre-launch testing and jump straight into development.

That’s not product development. That’s gambling.

No Framework Replaces Talking to Real People

At Referlytics, we once debated building a data-heavy analytics feature powered by advanced AI models. It sounded sleek. On paper, it would have made us look like the “next-gen” solution.

But something didn’t sit right.

If the goal was to be affordable and accessible to everyday creators and marketers, why were we investing in something that would double our infrastructure cost and slow down our roadmap?

I told the team:

“If our solution becomes too expensive to build, then we’ve already failed the test of affordability.”

We went back to users. We simplified the problem. We experimented with no-code tools and rapid feedback loops. It wasn't perfect—but it was real. And it worked.

Why Most MVPs Aren’t MVPs

Let’s talk truth.

Most of what founders call “MVPs” are actually bloated betas.

They come packed with 5–7 features, weeks of design polish, and complex backend logic—all in the name of “launching lean.”

But the core questions remain unanswered:

• Is this the right problem?

• Is this the right user?

• Is this the right solution for this user?

• Is it urgent?

• Is it worth paying for today?

“Your MVP is not the first version of your product. It’s the first version of your learning.” — Ash Maurya

In other words, if you’re not learning, it’s not an MVP. It’s just premature engineering.

Recommended by LinkedIn

Why 70% of Startups Fail at Tech Execution—Even with…

Pankaj Raawat

4 months ago

The new startup moat isn't money, but iteration speed.

Matas Rimkus

8 months ago

A (very) high-level guide to developing a minimum…

Chris Direduryan

3 years ago

The Real Test Isn’t Launching—It’s Retention

You don’t validate a product because someone tries it. You validate it because they:

• Use it again.

• Pay for it.

• Refer others to it.

• Complain when it’s gone.

That’s when you know it matters.

A few months ago, I pitched Referlytics to a founder. He said, “I don’t need this right now, but I know someone who does.”

That intro led to a new opportunity. The deal didn’t close—but the insight did.

The market may not always buy—but it always speaks. Your job is to listen before you build, not after.

What Founders Keep Getting Wrong

Here’s what I’ve seen over and over:

• Founders mistake feedback for demand.

• PMs build features because they “make sense,” not because they’re needed.

• Teams build for investors before building for users.

• Startups delay marketing until launch, then scramble to get visibility.

Africa’s tech scene doesn’t lack ideas. It lacks focus. We need to build with intention—because resources are too tight to afford waste.

Let’s Talk Numbers

Some stats to give this context:

• 42% of startups fail due to no market need (CB Insights).

• 74% of venture-backed African startups don’t survive beyond Series A.

• In usability studies, only 1 in 7 features have a measurable impact on core metrics (ProductBoard).

That’s not just unfortunate. That’s avoidable.

A Better Way to Build

Here’s a simple, repeatable flow I use and teach:

• Define one clear hypothesis: “This user has this problem and is willing to pay X to solve it.”

• Test it manually: Calls, landing pages, mock demos, concierge models.

• Experiment with the delivery: Cheap, fast, no-code if possible.

• Iterate based on behavior, not compliments.

• Involve marketing from day one: They’re your voice, not your megaphone.

This isn't a startup playbook. It's just good business sense.

Patience Builds Momentum

I know the pressure.

• You want to move fast.

• You want to impress investors.

• You want to “launch” something.

But here’s the counterintuitive truth:

The slower you go in the beginning, the faster you grow in the end.

Take 12 months if you need to.

Test, learn, experiment, and refine.

Because when the product is right, marketing becomes easier. When the market is clear, funding follows. When the vision is solid, the team aligns.

And that’s how real startups scale.

What’s the one thing you’re testing this month? Reply and let me know.

If this gave you clarity, share it with someone building in stealth or public right now.

Want more of this? Subscribe to stay ahead.

Rate this article