A company has started developing a new product. During execution the project team notices that another competitor has launched a product with very similar functionalities and a cheaper market price.
What should have been done differently to avoid this scenario?
An iterative life cycle approach should have been adopted. This approach involves shorter development cycles with frequent reassessments and adjustments. It allows a project team to respond rapidly to changes in market conditions and competitors, thereby minimizing the risk of developing a product that is already outperformed or outpriced by competitors. By frequently iterating and reassessing, the team could have detected the competitor's product early and adjusted their strategy accordingly.
A. A minimum viable product (MVP) should have been released to get feedback from the market.
The problem here was not the feedback or requirements. It is the pace of the product. So I vote D.
A, MVP to get feedback fast
A. A minimum viable product (MVP) should have been released to get feedback from the market
A. A minimum viable product (MVP) should have been released to get feedback from the market