Validate Before You Build: Exploring Pre-MVP Evidence Levels—Not Quantity—And Startup Performance in Early-Stage Software Ventures

Software startups operate in environments characterized by rapid change, high uncertainty, and limited resources, resulting in high failure rates and challenges such as premature scaling and cash flow mismanagement. Prior research on pre-MVP validation has largely measured activity by volume rather than by the strength of evidence produced, leaving open whether evidence type, rather than quantity, is associated with startup performance. This study addresses that gap by investigating how early-stage software startups validate their initial idea before building their first Minimum Viable Product (MVP). Through 29 semi-structured interviews with founders from 16 software startups, pre-MVP validation activities were extracted and inductively coded into a six-level Validation Canvas spanning three validation stages identified in the literature: problem validation, problem-solution fit, and product-market fit. Startup performance was assessed through a composite ranking across funding, revenue, profitability, and runway indicators, and validation activities were analyzed thematically to derive the six evidence levels. No clear relationship was observed between the number of validation events and startup performance. Instead, stronger-performing startups tended to reach higher levels of evidence—particularly securing contingent investment commitments (Level 5) or paying customers (Level 6) before full MVP development. Level 6—paying customers before the full product exists—is identified as the strongest form of pre-MVP market evidence, as it directly validates willingness-to-pay without relying on investor confidence. In this study, product-market fit is operationalised as demonstrated commercial viability through external financial commitments rather than interest signals or free sign-ups alone. Based on these exploratory findings, the study proposes the Hierarchy of Validation: a staged, bidirectional process model in which bottom-up traversal from informal interest signals (L1) toward paying customers (L6) emerged as the primary pattern among stronger-performing startups. A top-down direction, in which experienced founders begin at higher evidence levels and work downward, is proposed as a hypothesis for future research. To our knowledge, this is among the first accounts of pre-MVP validation that differentiates strength of evidence rather than volume of activity, contributing the Hierarchy of Validation as an original, exploratory framework for early-stage software startups. These findings remain exploratory and require validation in larger and more diverse samples.