Validation paralysis looks rational: more calls, more notes, more spreadsheets. After a point, extra research reduces speed more than it reduces risk.
Use explicit decision thresholds
Before interviews, define what "enough evidence" means.
Example threshold:
- 5 interviews with the same painful workflow.
- 3 users already paying for imperfect alternatives.
- 2 users willing to trial a rough MVP this month.
If you hit the threshold, move to build mode.
Separate unresolved questions by impact
Not every open question should block development.
- Critical uncertainty: could invalidate the problem.
- Design uncertainty: affects UX details, not core value.
- Optimization uncertainty: useful later, not now.
Only the first category should delay MVP launch.
Build the smallest testable promise
Your first version should prove one promise only. If your scope has three promises, you are still in fear-driven planning.
Launch, observe behavior, then iterate from evidence.
Weekly anti-paralysis check
Ask your team:
- Did we learn something this week that changed the build plan?
- Are we repeating interviews that confirm what we already know?
- What decision are we avoiding?
Paralysis usually hides behind "more research needed." This check keeps momentum honest.
