Before you launch that product, build that thing, or invest in that idea, you need to think ‘RAT’. 

A Riskiest Assumption Test (RAT) involves rapidly identifying and testing the riskiest assumptions and potential fail points for any initiative early in the process. 

BUILD vs TEST FIRST APPROACH

While a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) focuses on building meaningful value at minimal cost, a RAT focuses on testing the biggest assumptions behind your initiative. Sure, the MVP is also about testing an idea, but it tends to focus on previewing strengths and building on success, while the RAT is all about testing weaknesses upfront.

RAT can be further understood in relation to Eric Reis’ popular Lean Startup approach that puts MVP at its core and suggests a ‘build–measure-learn’ cycle to test a product hypothesis. RAT flips this process with rapid ‘learn-test’ cycles before building. As a result, while an MVP is generally delivered as a product that can be iterated, a RAT will often take the form of targeted experiments such as a landing page, survey, or narrow prototype, rather than anything resembling the product itself. 

IDENTIFY BIG ASSUMPTIONS. 

So how do you unearth your big assumptions for your RAT? Definitely start with First Principle Thinking and Inversion, and consider how you might test the most relevant of the following questions: 

• What if this project or initiative does not add the value we're assuming?

• What if you are wrong about who your audience is? 

• What if your audience doesn’t feel the pain of the problem you’ve identified? 

• What if your audience isn’t motivated to buy/ access your initiative? 

• What if your initiative doesn’t work as effectively as you hope?

• What if you/ your partners can’t execute to deliver your initiative? 

• What if the resources/ inputs you require are not available as you expect?

• What if a competitor or existing product will solve the problem just as or more effectively? 

• What is the Opportunity Cost of this initiative?

• What else might make your initiative fail? 

THE MVP KILLER?

RAT was originally put forward by Rik Ingram as an alternative to MVP. Ingram argued, “Instead of building an MVP, identify your riskiest assumption and test it. Replacing your MVP with a RAT will save you a lot of pain.”

In our view, both are legitimate and even potentially complementary approaches. Use them at different stages of development, or combine them by incorporating assumption testing as part of an MVP. 

IN YOUR LATTICEWORK. 

We’ve explored the contrast between Minimum Viable Product  and Riskiest Assumption Test, and you might want to take this further by finding out more about the Lean Startup. 

First Principle Thinking and Occam’s Razor are important complementary models to RAT as they both help to surface assumptions and cut to the core of a hypothesis. In addition, we see huge potential in combining RAT with Inversion, specifically the use of pre-mortems and asking ‘how will this fail’ at the beginning of projects. You can also repurpose the RICE Score and/or Risk Matrix to assess the level of concern for various assumptions to identify the 'big' ones. 

The learning approach at the core of a RAT leads to connections with Return on Failure and even the Scientific Method. In terms of implementing a RAT, you might also want to consider Prototypes and Split Testing.