What I've Learned Watching Startup Founders in Kerala Try to Launch
Products
I want to share something I've
noticed over several years of working closely with startup founders in Kerala
and across India — a pattern that shows up repeatedly, and that I think is
worth naming clearly.
Some founders go from idea to
live product in roughly three to four months. Others are still working toward
launch two years later. The difference between these two groups is rarely the
quality of the idea, the size of the budget, or even the experience of the
team.
It almost always comes down to
three decisions.
The First Decision: What You Are Not Building
The founders who launch quickly
make a clear, documented decision early on about what version 1 of their
product will not include. They write it down. They come back to it when the
temptation to add features arises — which it always does, usually around week
four or five of the build.
This decision is harder than it
sounds. Every excluded feature has a genuine reason to be included. There is
always a user who would benefit from it. The work of cutting is the work of
prioritisation, and prioritisation requires confidence that the core is strong
enough to prove itself alone.
Most of the founders I've seen
struggle with long timelines struggled specifically at this point. The feature
list grew. The build stretched. By the time something shipped, the cost of any
change was high and the feedback loop from real users had never been properly
opened.
The Second Decision: Who Your First Users Are
The second decision is about who
you let use the product first, and how honest you let that experience be.
Testing with friends,
colleagues, and supportive contacts gives feedback — but it's filtered
feedback. People who want you to succeed tell you different things than people
who have no relationship with you and are simply trying to accomplish a task.
Founders who launch well find a
way to get their product in front of strangers early. Not hundreds of strangers
— even five or ten people with no prior relationship can completely change what
you understand about your own product. The discomfort of that feedback is a
feature, not a problem.
The Third Decision: What Launch Actually Means
The third decision is about what
you consider a launch to be.
Many teams launch in the sense
that they deploy to a server and the product is technically accessible. Then
they wait. The waiting is the problem.
A launch, in the sense that
actually builds momentum, involves one clear distribution channel that is
activated before the product goes live. One channel. Not a marketing strategy —
a specific path to get specific people to the product in the first week.
For Kerala-based products
targeting local or national markets, this might mean direct outreach through a
professional network, a post in a relevant community, an introduction through
an industry contact. The channel doesn't matter as much as the specificity.
Vague distribution produces vague results.
Why Kerala Specifically
Kerala's startup ecosystem has
real strengths that are sometimes underestimated outside the state. The
engineering talent pool, particularly around the three technology parks, is
deep. The NRI community's exposure to international markets feeds back into the
kinds of products that get built here.
What has been a consistent gap —
and what is slowly closing — is the structured path from a founder's vision to
a working product in users' hands. The three decisions above are part of what
that path looks like when it works.
A more detailed breakdown of the
100-day process, including how the phases map to these decisions, is available
here:
Comments
Post a Comment