Why We Delayed the MyFAQ Beta — and Why AI Is Changing What an MVP Should Be

Every SaaS founder feels the pressure of a launch date. There is a well-known idea in the startup world, often linked to Reid Hoffman: if you are not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you launched too late. For years, this mindset shaped how software was built. The logic was simple: launch fast, get feedback, and improve while the product is already in the hands of users.

We were moving with that same sense of urgency toward the Beta launch of MyFAQ. But as the date got closer, we took a step back, looked carefully at the product, listened to our early users, and made a deliberate decision: we delayed the Beta.

It was not an easy call. Any founder knows how difficult it is to slow down when the market is moving fast and you are eager to put your solution in front of customers. But sometimes delaying is not a sign of hesitation. Sometimes it is a sign that you understand the responsibility of what you are building and the expectations of the people who will rely on it.

MyFAQ is a multi-tenant SaaS platform built for teams that need to organize internal knowledge and answer complex security questionnaires faster. We designed it to support RFx workflows such as RFIs, RFPs, and DDQs, where speed matters, but trust, accuracy, and human oversight matter even more. In this kind of environment, users are not experimenting with something casual. They are using a platform that can directly affect enterprise deals, compliance processes, and high-stakes decisions.

That reality is one of the main reasons we chose not to follow the classic idea of the “embarrassing MVP.” In some markets, launching something rough may be acceptable because users are willing to tolerate a certain level of imperfection. In our case, the cost of getting things wrong is much higher. If sales, legal, compliance, and security teams are going to rely on us, then the product has to earn that trust from the beginning.

At the same time, I believe AI is changing the entire discussion around what an MVP should be. AI-assisted development has made building, testing, and iterating much faster than it was even a short time ago. Because teams can move so much faster now, the minimum standard for what is considered viable is also higher. Customers know that products can improve quickly, and their expectations for early-stage software have changed with that reality.

That shift gave us room to make a different decision. Instead of rushing to launch an incomplete version just to say we launched, we used that speed to step back, test more rigorously, and improve the product in areas that we now believe are essential, not optional.

One of the biggest reasons for the delay came from our Alpha users. Before opening a wider Beta, we worked closely with a smaller group of early users to understand how real teams actually manage complex RFx workflows. Their feedback was extremely valuable, not only because it confirmed the problem we are solving, but because it showed us where the product still needed to mature. One clear theme was the need to compare AI-generated answers more effectively against validated, human-approved responses. That was not just a nice improvement for later. It was a core requirement for maintaining quality control and trust in the system.

In a more traditional startup mindset, that kind of feedback might have been added to a future roadmap while the Beta launched anyway. But because our development cycles are much faster today, we did not feel forced into that tradeoff. We were able to respond immediately and build around what users were telling us, instead of asking them to wait for a future version. For us, that matters. We want early users to feel that they are helping shape the product in a meaningful way, not simply testing something that is still too early for their real needs.

The second major reason was integration with the Microsoft ecosystem. As we observed how teams were working, it became very clear that Microsoft 365 was not just an adjacent toolset. It was the environment where they already lived every day. If using MyFAQ required people to manually download files, re-upload them into our platform, and then move results back again, we would be creating friction instead of removing it.

That is why we decided that deep Microsoft integration needed to be part of the Beta experience. We used this time to build support for working more naturally with OneDrive and SharePoint, so users can access and manage source documents within the workflows they already know. We also extended our thinking to Microsoft Teams, because real collaboration does not happen only in documents. It happens in conversations, channels, and quick questions between teams. Bringing our AI capabilities into that environment was important because it aligns the product with how people already work instead of asking them to change behavior just to use our platform.

For me, this delay was ultimately about product responsibility. It is easy to celebrate speed in startups, and speed is still important. But speed only matters when it moves you toward something users can actually trust and adopt. AI has made it possible to build faster, but I think the real opportunity is not just to ship sooner. It is to use that speed to raise the quality of what we consider ready.

Delaying the Beta was not the easiest path, but I am confident it was the right one. We are bringing MyFAQ to market with stronger workflows, deeper integrations, and a product that reflects the real needs of enterprise teams much better than it would have if we had simply rushed to hit a date.

The Beta is coming very soon, and I am excited to share more when it is truly ready.