Complete firstDeliverable value
Be able to fulfil a concrete request with a measurable customer outcome.
Informal advice without an outcome tests a different service.
Method guideProduct Discovery
Concierge MVP
A practical method guide: clarify prerequisites and materials, understand the complete process, and look up outputs, pitfalls, and stop criteria.
ComplexityMedium
Time1-4 Wochen
Participants3-10 Kunden
FormatWorkshop + async
MaturityEstablished
01
Prerequisite
What needs to be finished first
Complete firstExplicit agreement
Openly agree manual delivery, scope, price and data handling.
Unclear promises create special requests and distort costs.
02
Preparation
What needs to be ready before start
Materials
Service brief, request list, time and outcome log.
People / roles
Customers, service owner, delivery person.
Pre-read
Define a narrow service, suitable customers, price and delivery boundaries.
Time needed
45–60 minutes planning; several real service cycles over days or weeks.
Setup
Create an explicit service brief and request list; separately track time, outcome, actual use and payments per request.
03
Core question
The one question this method answers
Which value do people actually use when we deliver it personally?
04
Flow
Phases with goal, actions, output and pitfall
A Concierge MVP openly delivers a narrow customer benefit through personal manual work. The team learns from actual use, return behaviour, effort and, where applicable, payments before automating the process.
Concierge MVP· worksheet
Fictional example
A Concierge MVP openly delivers a narrow customer benefit through personal manual work. The team learns from actual use, return behaviour, effort and, where applicable, payments before automating the process.
Service and learning assumption
For whom is which concrete value openly delivered manually? Record price, boundary and learning question.
Fictional: Jana personally assembles three schedule-compatible course options for working learners within two days. Personal service, €20 per request, booking excluded. Learning question: Is the shortlist used and paid for again?
Requests and effort
Track request, steps, outcome, time and exceptional work separately.
Four requests: A 35, B 40, C 45, D 60 minutes, 180 minutes in total. D additionally requires a venue search, flagged as an exception. All receive three options.
Use and return behaviour
Which actual actions, repeat requests and payments are evidenced?
Fictionally, A and C each book a suggested course. B postpones, D chooses none. A later places a paid repeat request. That payment belongs to the next cycle.
Costs and next decision
Calculate revenue and actual costs for the same period; distinguish personal attention from automatable work.
First cycle: 4 × €20 = €80 revenue. 180 minutes = 3 hours; at an internal €30/hour labour rate, labour costs are €90, a −€10 balance before other costs. The team tests standardised schedule intake; general demand and profitability remain unproven.
All example details are fictional and illustrate the application.
- 1
Offer
Offer
Goal
Service agreement
Inputs for this step
- Problem evidence and delivery capacity
Actions
- Openly agree segment, concrete outcome, manual scope and price.
- Define learning assumption, permitted data and stop criteria before the first request.
Output
Service agreement
Do customers understand the personal service and boundary?
Quality check
Do customers understand the personal service and boundary?
Pitfall
The offer appears to be finished software. Explicitly explain the manual service.
Timing: 15–20 minutes
- 2
Delivery
Delivery
Goal
Delivered service
Inputs for this step
- Agreed requests
Actions
- Personally fulfil real requests and log work steps and time.
- Deliver the same core service across cases; separately flag exceptions, contacts and unpaid extra work.
Output
Delivered service
Has the promised customer outcome actually been delivered?
Quality check
Has the promised customer outcome actually been delivered?
Pitfall
The founder rescues every case with unlimited effort. Apply time and service limits; document failures.
Timing: Servicezyklus / service cycle minutes
- 3
Use
Use review
Goal
Use evidence
Inputs for this step
- Delivered service and follow-up contacts
Actions
- Observe whether the result is used and customers return or pay.
- Record praise, actual use, return behaviour and payment separately; ask about concrete value and alternatives.
Output
Use evidence
Is return behaviour observed or merely promised?
Quality check
Is return behaviour observed or merely promised?
Pitfall
A personal favour is counted as market demand. Note relationship effects and add suitable independent cases.
Timing: Nach Lieferung / after delivery minutes
- 4
Learning decision
Learning decision
Goal
Service learning decision
Inputs for this step
- Service log and costs
Actions
- Compare value, return use, revenue and actual labour costs.
- Separate repeatable core steps from the value of personal attention; justify the next trial or limited automation.
Output
Service learning decision
Is value plausible with less personal attention?
Quality check
Is value plausible with less personal attention?
Pitfall
Manual-service satisfaction is treated as proof of software value. Test reduced personal support in a follow-up.
Timing: 30–45 minutes
05
Artifact
What comes out at the end
Sketch: what the artifact looks like
Form
Service log with customer outcome, return use, payments and manual costs.
Versioning / ownership
Record date and scope; retain the previous version and reason when changing it.
Tool alternatives
- Request spreadsheet
- Simple service inbox
- Time and cost log
concierge-mvp-working-template.md
Define a narrow service, suitable customers, price and delivery boundaries.
Concierge MVP: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Complete cycle Time: 45–60 minutes planning; several real service cycles over days or weeks.
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Service brief, request list, time and outcome log.
- Roles: Customers, service owner, delivery person.
- Advance information: Define a narrow service, suitable customers, price and delivery boundaries.
- Overall time needed: 45–60 minutes planning; several real service cycles over days or weeks.
- Setup: Create an explicit service brief and request list; separately track time, outcome, actual use and payments per request.
Prepare for the work steps
Offer: Offer
- Problem evidence and delivery capacity
Delivery: Delivery
- Agreed requests
Use: Use review
- Delivered service and follow-up contacts
Learning decision: Learning decision
- Service log and costs
Concierge MVP· worksheet
Service and learning assumption
For whom is which concrete value openly delivered manually? Record price, boundary and learning question.
...
Requests and effort
Track request, steps, outcome, time and exceptional work separately.
...
Use and return behaviour
Which actual actions, repeat requests and payments are evidenced?
...
Costs and next decision
Calculate revenue and actual costs for the same period; distinguish personal attention from automatable work.
...
Answer the prompts with your own information. Explicitly mark unknowns and assumptions.
Giff Constable: Talking to Humans
Offer: Offer
Expected artifact: Service agreement
Do customers understand the personal service and boundary?
Entry:
...
- Do customers understand the personal service and boundary?
Delivery: Delivery
Expected artifact: Delivered service
Has the promised customer outcome actually been delivered?
Entry:
...
- Has the promised customer outcome actually been delivered?
Use: Use review
Expected artifact: Use evidence
Is return behaviour observed or merely promised?
Entry:
...
- Is return behaviour observed or merely promised?
Learning decision: Learning decision
Expected artifact: Service learning decision
Is value plausible with less personal attention?
Entry:
...
- Is value plausible with less personal attention?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/concierge-mvp/run-sheet
06
Example output
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional example for orientation. Counts and timings describe this case and are not universal requirements.
concierge-mvp-beispiel.md
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Fictional example
Service and learning assumption: Fictional: Jana personally assembles three schedule-compatible course options for working learners within two days. Personal service, €20 per request, booking excluded. Learning question: Is the shortlist used and paid for again?
Requests and effort: Four requests: A 35, B 40, C 45, D 60 minutes, 180 minutes in total. D additionally requires a venue search, flagged as an exception. All receive three options.
Use and return behaviour: Fictionally, A and C each book a suggested course. B postpones, D chooses none. A later places a paid repeat request. That payment belongs to the next cycle.
Costs and next decision: First cycle: 4 × €20 = €80 revenue. 180 minutes = 3 hours; at an internal €30/hour labour rate, labour costs are €90, a −€10 balance before other costs. The team tests standardised schedule intake; general demand and profitability remain unproven.
07
Pitfalls
Recognize symptoms and steer against them
Quick overview, the full text is in the matching phase in the flow
- OfferThe offer appears to be finished software.View in phase
- DeliveryThe founder rescues every case with unlimited effort.View in phase
- Use reviewA personal favour is counted as market demand.View in phase
- Learning decisionManual-service satisfaction is treated as proof of software value.View in phase
Trap
Offer
Symptom
The offer appears to be finished software.
What to do
Explicitly explain the manual service.
Trap
Delivery
Symptom
The founder rescues every case with unlimited effort.
What to do
Apply time and service limits; document failures.
Trap
Use review
Symptom
A personal favour is counted as market demand.
What to do
Note relationship effects and add suitable independent cases.
Trap
Learning decision
Symptom
Manual-service satisfaction is treated as proof of software value.
What to do
Test reduced personal support in a follow-up.
08
Stop criteria
When to pause, resolve prerequisites, or choose another approach
If special requests hide the pattern, hold the service boundary and log extra effort separately.
Finished the method guide?
Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.