Niche Research: What to Check Before Building an MVP
Start with a complaint about a specific task
I have AI agents set up to collect material for niche research. When I review it, I look for specific, firsthand descriptions of a problem.
Some complaints describe problems people can live with. I look for details about what the person was doing and what they wanted to change. Those details help me define a solution and its minimum viable product, or MVP.
Complaints about established tools give me a useful starting point. I have seen people describe Jira as too large and inconvenient. Others complain that QuickBooks costs too much for its features, or describe difficulties with Google Sheets. Naming a tool they already use gives me a place to start investigating.
A broad complaint still needs a closer look because it does not tell me which task to improve. Without that detail, I could end up planning to replace a large tool when the user only needs help with one part of it.
One complaint I remember was about Photoshop. A user found the many color settings involved in exporting cumbersome. That pointed to a particular task within a much larger product.
I would ask what they were exporting and which settings caused trouble. That would help me understand whether the difficulty was choosing the right settings or repeating the work. Each could call for a different improvement.
When reviewing a complaint, ask:
- What was the person trying to do?
- What specifically made it difficult?
- How did they handle it, and what remained troublesome?
Save the example that answers those questions. If the account stays vague, write down the missing detail before collecting more similar complaints.
Check whether the MVP fits your strengths
Once the problem is clear, I judge whether I can handle the work an MVP requires. I move on when that scope seems manageable.
When you’re starting a business for the first time, I think it helps to build on what you do well. List your capabilities and strengths, then consider how they could improve the user’s task. A strength matters when it produces a benefit customers can recognize.
Describe one improvement that would help the user on its own. List the work it requires, then separate what you can already do from what you would need to learn. A feature may sound simple but require a tool you have never used. Include that learning time when judging whether you can take on the MVP.
Get developerasun’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
For the Photoshop example, suppose the user has to repeat the same steps each time they export. If automation is one of your strengths, you could look into automating one of those steps. Then check what you already know how to build and what you’d need to learn.
Look for gaps in the incumbent’s offer
When starting on my own, I’d avoid competing directly with an established player’s strongest features. I would deliberately examine the tasks it leaves unsupported or handles poorly.
Use the original complaint to decide where to look. Which task still causes trouble for this user, and how well does the existing product handle it? Look for a problem you could address with your own strengths, and keep the first solution focused on it.
A product may serve its main customers well while leaving a particular task cumbersome for someone else. That task is where I would investigate a smaller solution.
I also look at how established competitors position their prices. Record the relevant product or plan and what is included. Consider whether your improvement would replace something the person pays for or sit alongside it. That distinction determines which costs to compare.
When someone says a tool is expensive, I want to know what they receive for that price and which parts they need. I would also ask what they would choose instead.
For example, if a small add-on helps with one task inside a larger tool, the user might still need the larger tool. A lower price than the full product would say little about whether the add-on is worth buying. The question would be whether the improvement justifies an additional expense.
Compare the parts of the existing product this user needs with the improvement you could provide. Then ask whether that improvement would remove enough trouble to justify paying for it.
Check what it will take to keep the MVP running
Even if I can build the MVP, I still need to judge whether I can maintain it. List the services your MVP needs to work, then identify what you control and what depends on those services.
If your MVP gets its data from another service, a change there may stop users from completing their task. Find out what you would need to update in your product and whether you can get the information needed to make that update.
Allow time for failures and questions from users. Consider whether you could handle that work alongside your job. If the MVP relies on several services, investigate whether a first version could use fewer. If one connection is essential, include the work of maintaining it when judging whether the MVP is manageable.
Decide what to do next
Use this template to summarize what you’ve found. Keep each answer brief.
Problem (with source):
First improvement:
MVP scope and my strengths:
Existing options and gap:
Maintenance risks:
Main unanswered question:
Next action:If the task is clear and the work looks manageable, plan a small trial with someone who has the problem. If a key question is still unanswered, ask a user to show you their workflow or test the technical part you’re unsure about. If the work is more than you can take on, narrow the scope or set the candidate aside.
Originally published at https://nichejuice.com/blog/series/niche-or-miss/niche-research-what-to-check-before-building-an-mvp?utm_source=medium&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=content_distribution on October 21, 2026.
