How to Identify and Prioritize Core MVP Features in 2025
Building a successful MVP in 2025 starts with knowing which features truly matter. Vedran’s guide breaks down how to identify and prioritize core features using proven frameworks helping teams focus on must-haves, avoid wasted effort, and validate their product direction early.
Bringing a new digital product to market usually starts with building a minimum viable product, or MVP. An MVP is the simplest version of a product that solves a real problem for users. It includes only the most important features required to learn if people want or will use the product.
Deciding which features belong in the MVP is a structured process. This process helps teams focus their resources on what matters most for launch. Understanding how to prioritize features is an important step in shaping the direction of any new product.
What is MVP feature prioritization
MVP feature prioritization is the process of selecting and ranking which features are most important for the first version of a digital product. This approach differs from full product planning because it focuses only on features needed to test assumptions and deliver core value to early users.
The main purpose is to test business hypotheses while using minimal resources. A business hypothesis is an assumption about what users need or how they will behave when interacting with your product. Product-market fit happens when your product matches the needs of its target market and solves their main problem.
MVP feature prioritization frameworks help teams avoid building unnecessary features while ensuring the product addresses real user problems. The result is a focused product that can validate core assumptions quickly.
Clarify the core problem and user needs
Feature prioritization begins by identifying the specific problem the product addresses and the users it targets. Without clear problem definition, teams may prioritize features that don’t address real user needs often because product strategy decisions were made without sufficient validation. A 2025 study by Founders Forum Group shows that 42% of startups fail due to misreading market demand - creating products nobody wants.
Problem identification involves conducting user interviews and surveys to discover what difficulties users experience. This research confirms that problems are real and worth solving before any features are designed or built.
User research methods include:
- Customer interviews: Direct conversations with potential users about their challenges
- Competitor analysis: Examining how existing products address similar problems
- Market surveys: Broader research to understand user preferences and behaviors
Teams create user personas based on research data. These personas describe typical users, including their needs, behaviors, and pain points. This foundational research reduces the chance of making expensive changes later in development.
Effective prioritization frameworks for 2025
Structured frameworks help teams decide which features to include in a minimum viable product. These frameworks offer different ways to organize and rank features based on team size, industry, and product type.
MoSCoW method
The MoSCoW method divides features into four categories: Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, and Won't-have.
- Must-have: Features essential for the MVP to function
- Should-have: Important features that can be delayed if necessary
- Could-have: Useful features for future releases
- Won't-have: Features explicitly excluded from current scope
For a ride-sharing MVP, "request a ride" is a Must-have, "rate your driver" is a Should-have, "choose music in car" is a Could-have, and "schedule rides a week in advance" is a Won't-have.
Kano model
The Kano model classifies features based on their effect on user satisfaction. This model helps teams understand which features users expect versus which ones create delight.
- Basic features: Expected functionality users assume will exist
- Performance features: Features that increase satisfaction when improved
- Excitement features: Unexpected features that surprise and delight users
Teams apply the Kano model by surveying users about how they feel when features are present or absent, then categorizing features based on responses.
RICE scoring
RICE scoring uses four factors: Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. This quantitative approach helps teams compare features objectively.
The calculation is: (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort
- Reach: Number of users affected per time period
- Impact: Degree of positive effect on users (typically rated 1-3)
- Confidence: How certain you are about reach and impact estimates (percentage)
- Effort: Time and resources required to build the feature
A feature reaching 500 users monthly with an impact of 2, confidence of 80%, and requiring 10 person-days would score: (500 × 2 × 0.8) ÷ 10 = 80.
Steps to identify and rank features
This systematic process works with any prioritization framework and involves product managers, designers, developers, and stakeholders working together.
Gather and document feature ideas
Feature ideas come from multiple sources including user feedback, support requests, competitive analysis, stakeholder requirements, and technical team suggestions. Teams collect these ideas in a central location and record where each idea originated and its rationale.
Filter for business and user value
Teams review feature ideas and remove those that don't align with business goals or user needs. Filtering criteria include:
- Strategic alignment: Connection to main business objectives
- User demand: Evidence that users want this feature
- Differentiation: Competitive advantage the feature provides
Evaluate complexity and feasibility
The team examines implementation requirements for each feature. This evaluation includes development time estimates, technical risks, required skills and personnel, and dependencies on other features or systems.
Score and compare results
Each feature receives a score using the selected prioritization framework. Multiple team members participate in scoring to provide balanced perspectives and reduce individual bias. Teams then compare scores to determine which features to include first.
Validate with real users
Teams test their chosen features with actual users through prototype testing, preference surveys, and analytics from similar existing features. This validation confirms whether selected features solve real problems for users.
Common mistakes to avoid
Teams face several challenges during MVP feature prioritization that can derail the process.
Combining discovery and delivery
Some teams begin prioritizing features before fully understanding the user problem. Discovery involves learning what to build, while delivery focuses on how to build it. When these steps are mixed, feature choices may not align with actual user needs.
Skipping stakeholder alignment
When stakeholders disagree on priorities, projects experience scope changes and conflicting requirements. Alignment workshops or regular discussions before prioritization help prevent these issues. A 2025 study by Founders Forum Group shows that 42% of startups fail due to misreading market demand - creating products nobody wants. (Founders Forum Group, 2025)
Overcomplicating the scoring model
Complex scoring models slow down decisions and create confusion. Starting with a basic system helps teams organize priorities effectively. Additional complexity can be added only when necessary.
Ignoring early feedback
Some teams don't update priorities after receiving feedback from early users. Real user feedback often reveals which features matter most, making it important to revisit and update priorities throughout the project.
Where to go next for MVP development
After choosing which features to prioritize, MVP development involves several focused activities. The design and development phase transforms prioritized features into working software that users can interact with.
User testing allows real people to try the MVP and provide feedback about functionality and user experience. Teams use this information to plan future iterations and improvements.
Building an MVP requires expertise in design, development, and product strategy. The Discovery and Design phases lay the foundation for turning prioritized features into a market-ready product.
Start a conversation about building your digital product.
Frequently asked questions about MVP feature prioritization
How do you prioritize features when user feedback conflicts with business goals?
Use a weighted scoring method that assigns values to both user importance and business impact, allowing teams to make decisions that reflect both perspectives objectively.
What happens when technical constraints eliminate high-priority features from your MVP?
Teams typically look for alternative solutions or break complex features into smaller, more manageable components that still address important user goals within technical limitations.
How often do teams revisit feature priorities during MVP development?
Most teams review and update feature priorities every two to four weeks, allowing adjustments based on new user feedback, market changes, or development discoveries.
Do B2B and B2C products require different feature prioritization approaches?
Yes, B2B products typically prioritize features that demonstrate clear ROI and integration capabilities, while B2C products focus more on user experience and engagement features.
