How to Iterate an AI Product — From 0.1 to 1.0 and Beyond
Value Step Iteration — a method for guiding AI product iteration by supporting high-effort steps in expert workflows, one step at a time.
Building AI products isn’t hard anymore.
That is, if we confuse AI products with AI systems.
#beyondAI
Not long ago, the primary difficulty in AI was the model and the entire system around it. Designing, training, and deploying machine learning models at scale required specialized infrastructure and niche expertise. But with the rise of GenAI, not only were new capabilities introduced, but the arrival of foundation models shifted much of that difficulty away from internal product teams. Today, the most advanced language, vision, and reasoning capabilities can be accessed through a simple API, maintained by a handful of vendors who have taken on the challenge of scaling intelligence as a service.
So yes, one could argue that building something with AI has never been easier. But building something with AI that truly deserves to be called a product is still as hard as ever. A real product is something that earns repeated usage, delivers sustainable value, and justifies long-term investment. And none of these vendors handle the parts that matter most to your company. They don't uncover real user pain points. They don't manage internal politics. And they don't ensure that AI fits into business-critical workflows where trust must be earned, not assumed.
A real product is not a demo, not a prototype, and not a PoC. It is something that makes a measurable difference. It is something people use regularly because it is better than the alternative. It improves outcomes in a repeatable way. And over time, it either generates revenue, reduces cost, or creates undeniable internal efficiency that changes how the organization operates. That bar hasn’t changed. And neither has the difficulty of reaching it.
We may no longer need to build an AI system ourselves. But we still need to build the AI product. And that part is still hard to get right.
That is why knowing how to iterate carefully, intentionally, and always anchored in value is not just helpful for an AI Product Manager. It is foundational.
This Article Is About Internal AI Products
The focus here is on internal AI products. These are the kinds of tools that live inside enterprises, embedded in business workflows, and designed to support teams like sales, HR, customer operations, finance, or IT. In these environments, success is rarely measured by user growth or market share. It’s measured by adoption, time saved, process compliance, or impact on key business outcomes.
While many of the principles in this article, especially those around value-based iteration, also apply to external AI products, the nature of iteration is different when the users are customers. External products are shaped by market dynamics, monetization strategies, and competitive positioning. Internal AI products, on the other hand, grow within an existing system. You’re not launching into a blank canvas. You’re building into legacy workflows, informal shortcuts, and organizational expectations that were never designed with your product in mind.
That’s where this approach begins: with the reality of building AI products in the messy middle of real businesses.
Related Article
How Internal AI Products Grow: The Value Step Iteration - Method
This approach isn’t an entirely new idea. It builds on established product thinking, using the same principles you’ll find in Lean Startup, Outcome-Driven Innovation, or Continuous Discovery. What makes it worth calling out here is that it’s essential in AI product development, especially for internal use.
Internal products operate in highly entangled environments. The product doesn’t enter a greenfield. It enters a system that’s already full. It has to coexist with legacy systems, awkward handoffs, informal workarounds, and teams who already have a way of getting things done.
Even if that way is inefficient, it’s familiar.
And that familiarity has power.
Growing into that environment means the product must start by fitting into a small, real task. It needs to be narrow enough that it doesn’t disrupt the system, but valuable enough that people notice the improvement. Once it’s proven there, it can expand. But not before. Internal AI products don’t earn adoption through excitement or novelty. They earn it through consistent, grounded usefulness. That means every part of the product must make sense in the context it’s entering.
That’s why each feature, each iteration, and each technical decision must be scoped as a value hypothesis.
This changes how you prioritize, how you scope, and how you release.
You don’t build more unless the last iteration has been adopted.
You don’t expand scope unless what you’ve already built is solving a real problem.
You don’t solve downstream tasks if upstream usage is still low.
This doesn’t slow you down. It keeps your effort aligned with reality.
So while this approach is not new, and while its principles are shared across other product disciplines, what makes it non-negotiable in internal AI product development is the combination of complexity, ambiguity, and proximity to the user.
You’re not building for abstract personas.
You’re building for colleagues.
And they’ll only adopt your product if it delivers clear, immediate, and lasting value. One iteration at a time.
The Real Job of Internal AI Products: Workflow Support
Internal AI products — especially those powered by generative AI — are most effective when they support the people closest to the business problem: subject matter experts. These are the analysts, controllers, legal reviewers, strategists, and other domain professionals who carry deep institutional knowledge and apply it through structured, repeatable work.
These experts are not waiting for full automation. They are looking for support tools that reduce manual effort, eliminate routine steps, and help them move faster and more confidently through their tasks. GenAI can do exactly that. Not by replacing the expert, but by augmenting the steps where friction, repetition, or low-leverage effort slow things down.
Every task a subject matter expert performs follows a workflow. Some steps are linear. Others loop or require judgment. But each step, regardless of size or visibility, takes time. One might take thirty seconds, another half a day. One might be mentally heavy, another just tedious. The key is not to obsess over which step is more “valuable”, but the most time-consuming. Because from the expert’s point of view, the value lies in completing the entire workflow so they can produce the deliverable — a report, a contract, a presentation, a recommendation.
That’s why the priority isn’t evaluating the strategic value of each individual step. It’s identifying where the most effort accumulates. Because if we can reduce the time or complexity of just one high-effort step, we accelerate the entire task. That creates capacity. It frees up expert time. It opens the door to faster delivery. And faster delivery often has very real financial consequences — shorter billing cycles, earlier client handoffs, or quicker internal decision-making.
Each step in a workflow, then, has an indirect but very real impact on delivery — and therefore on business value.
This is exactly where Value Step Iteration becomes essential. The goal is to solve one real step in the value chain of the SME. Once that’s done — once it’s working, adopted, and useful — then you move to the next. Each supported step moves the system forward without overwhelming users or overcommitting your team.
Value Step Iteration is a way of scoping AI product development by focusing on individual workflow steps — not features, not UI screens, not model capabilities. It asks one question at a time:
Which step in the expert’s workflow consumes the most time or effort, and can AI meaningfully reduce it?
And this is exactly why the Value Step Method is so powerful in internal AI product work. It treats every iteration not as a technical milestone, but as a test of whether one step in a workflow can be supported in a way that moves the whole system forward. You don’t need to automate the full task. You need to support one step, clearly, confidently, and usefully. And when that’s done, you earn the right to move on.
How Versioning Supports the Value Step Method
Once we understand that each AI product iteration should support a meaningful step in an expert’s workflow, the next challenge is structuring how we build — and how we know when we’re ready to move forward.
This is where the Value Step Method benefits from a clear versioning model. It gives the team — and the organization — a shared language to describe progress. Not just in terms of functionality shipped, but in terms of how much trust has been earned, how deeply the product is used, and how reliably it supports the delivery of actual work.
We use a semantic versioning-like structure here not only to track internal releases, but to represent product maturity through the lens of value creation and adoption. Each version tells a story about how far the AI product has grown into its environment — and how confidently it supports a step that matters.
Here’s how the progression unfolds within the Value Step Method:
0.1 – 0.3: Early learning stages. You're validating that a problem exists in the workflow and that AI could reasonably support it. The system may work in parts, but lacks stability. Users are curious, but not yet relying on it. This stage is about listening, testing, and refining your understanding of what to build.
0.4 – 0.6: A focused, functional slice starts to emerge. You’ve solved one specific step well enough that some users begin to replace manual effort. The output may still need review, but the time savings or flow improvement is real. This is where User Acceptance Testing (UAT) becomes essential, not as a formality, but as evidence that value is landing.
0.7 – 0.9: The product handles one full task end-to-end with minimal oversight. It has earned trust. The expert begins to rely on it, not just experiment with it. Usage is self-sustaining. Feedback shifts from “is this useful?” to “can this be expanded?” Now the assistant is no longer a pilot — it’s becoming part of the real workflow.
1.0: The product is embedded. It operates independently, consistently, and meaningfully supports delivery. It’s trusted. The workflow flows better with it than without it. If your team stepped away, the users wouldn’t — because the tool is now part of how work gets done.
This structure prevents premature scaling and anchors progress to real, observed outcomes. It slows down hype and speeds up clarity. And it keeps everyone aligned on what matters: earning the right to take the next step, one clear piece of user value at a time.
That’s the essence of the Value Step Method.
Applying the Value Step Method
Let’s make the Value Step Method tangible.
Imagine you’re building a Sales Enablement Assistant to support internal sales teams in preparing for meetings. The aim isn’t to automate everything. The aim is to reduce effort where it accumulates — one workflow step at a time.
Sales reps might spend 30 to 60 minutes before each client meeting collecting scattered information. They pull CRM history, search email threads, check for open tickets, review notes, and try to stitch it all together into something actionable. It’s inefficient, inconsistent, and error-prone. But every step is required to reach the deliverable — a well-prepared, high-quality client conversation.
This is exactly where the Value Step Method applies. You’re not trying to replace the rep’s expertise or redesign the entire process. You’re trying to identify which step consumes the most effort, and reduce it meaningfully, so the whole task moves faster with less friction.
Phase 1: Deconstruct the Workflow
You begin by mapping the full set of actions the SME performs to deliver the output. For a sales rep preparing a meeting, the steps might include:
Pulling CRM data
Surfacing past communications
Highlighting active deals or support escalations
Generating talking points or reminders
Packaging all of it into a meeting-ready brief
Each step takes time. Some are tedious, some mentally demanding, some dependent on multiple systems. The task can’t be delivered without all of them, but not all of them are equally painful. The goal is to understand where that effort stacks up, and where AI support would be immediately useful and low-risk to adopt.
Phase 2: Prioritize by Effort — Not Feature Appeal
With the workflow mapped, you now apply Value Step Prioritization. That means choosing where to start based on effort concentration and feasibility, not based on what’s technically impressive or what stakeholders ask for first.
For example:
Step 1 - Summarize CRM activity — Structured, stable, and quick to implement.
Step 2 - Add past interactions — Higher complexity, but high value for user context.
Step 3 - Highlight support issues — Relevant data exists, but signals must be interpreted.
Step 4 - Format into a briefing — Only makes sense once the content is reliable.
Step 5 - Suggest talking points — High ambition. Trust must already be in place.
This way, you're not only identifying where support is needed in the workflow — you're also generating a product roadmap that reflects real user effort, not internal assumptions. You begin where confidence is high, time savings are visible, and the expert knows the step well enough to evaluate the quality of support. It’s a roadmap that’s earned, not imagined.
Phase 3: Iterating an AI Assistant from 0.1 to 1.0 — One Step at a Time
Now you build — but in small, scoped releases, each targeting one meaningful step in the workflow. Every release is a test: Can this specific step be reliably supported in a way that reduces effort and builds trust with the SME?
In this case, you might decide to begin with Step 1 and Step 2, since they both focus on surfacing past interactions — a critical part of meeting prep — even though they draw from different source systems. The value is clear, the data exists, and users already know what “good” looks like.
So the first version of the Sales Enablement Assistant focuses only on these two capabilities. The team iterates from 0.1 to 1.0 solely around making this functionality useful, stable, and adopted. No additional features. No unnecessary expansion. Just making sure that this slice of workflow is genuinely improved and trusted.
And because the scope is small and focused, this path can realistically lead to a strong, adopted MVP 1.0 within 1 to 3 months — one that solves a real problem, earns a place in the workflow, and gives you a solid foundation for future iterations.
Here’s what iteration looks like:
Version 0.1 — First Exposure, First AI Touchpoint
The assistant is introduced to a small group of users
It can fetch and summarize CRM data from one system
The AI generates briefs with basic metadata and deal context
🎯 Goal: Validate that the AI adds value immediately, even in a narrow scope
👥 UAT: Do users trust the summaries? Does it save them any time?
Version 0.2 – 0.3 — Expand Input Sources, Maintain Clarity
Add a second data source: e.g. past email conversations
Merge AI-generated summaries from both systems into one preview
Add light metadata (date, contact, topic) so users can verify without switching tools
🎯 Goal: See if users start using it unprompted#
👥 UAT: Is the assistant’s context accurate enough to reduce manual lookup?
Version 0.4 – 0.6 — Structure, Feedback, and Flow
Introduce simple formatting into the briefing: sections, headings, and collapsed views
Add a “Was this helpful?” feedback prompt for each section
Begin timing usage (e.g., do users open it before meetings?)
🎯 Goal: Make the assistant’s presence feel structured, consistent, and safe
👥UAT: Are users adjusting their workflows to include the assistant?
Version 0.7 – 0.9 — Reliable Prep, Reduced Manual Effort
Auto-deliver the briefing ahead of meetings via Slack or email
AI adjusts the summary slightly depending on meeting type
Users no longer open multiple systems before calls
🎯 Goal: Shift from usage to reliance
👥UAT: Does the assistant fully replace previous prep steps for most users?
✅ MVP 1.0 — Fully Embedded Assistant for Prep Tasks
The AI Assistant is now part of the meeting workflow
It surfaces relevant context with minimal user input
No major gaps remain in the selected steps (Step 1 & Step 2)
Success Metric: Users would notice if the assistant disappeared
Optional: Product team can declare MVP 1.0 before reaching 0.9 if adoption and trust are strong
🧠 Note : You Don’t Have to “Complete” Every Version
The path from 0.1 to 1.0 isn’t a checklist — it’s a maturity scale. If you reach a point by version 0.4 or 0.6 where the assistant is clearly helping, being used, and considered trustworthy, you can declare MVP 1.0 and focus on scaling, onboarding more users, or expanding to the next Value Step.
The key is not building more, but proving usefulness earlier.Beyond 1.0: Iteration Doesn’t Stop — It Evolves
Reaching MVP 1.0 means the assistant reliably supports one or more high-effort workflow steps. It’s used. It’s trusted. And it has earned its place in the way work gets done. But with the Value Step Method, 1.0 isn’t the finish line — it’s just the moment you know the product is alive.
Beyond this point, iteration becomes more strategic. The goal is no longer to prove usefulness, but to extend value responsibly — without breaking trust, introducing unnecessary friction, or overloading the assistant with capabilities it doesn’t need.
Every next step should still follow the same principle: support one real workflow step at a time, and earn the right to build further.
Version 1.1 – 1.3: Deepen the Fit
Improve system performance, AI output clarity, and UI polish
Add fallback logic for missing data or integration hiccups
Refactor internal flows to reduce manual dependencies
Add light internal documentation to help support scale
🎯 Goal: Make the assistant more resilient, faster to use, and easier to maintain — without changing its core purpose
Version 1.4 – 1.6: Enrich the Context
Introduce additional signals — e.g. product usage, customer satisfaction, escalation status
Tune the AI briefings to adjust based on context (e.g. new client vs long-time customer)
Let SMEs contribute improvements to prompt templates or adjust summary preferences
🎯 Goal: Increase the assistant’s relevance and accuracy without increasing user effort
Version 1.7 – 1.9: Expand the Workflow
Support additional teams such as customer success, technical account managers, or partner sales
Adapt briefing templates to their language, tasks, and workflows
Start identifying new high-effort steps (e.g. follow-up emails, meeting documentation)
🎯 Goal: Extend the assistant to adjacent use cases that mirror the original workflow — not reinvent it
✅ Version 2.0+: Generalize the Pattern (Only If It Makes Sense)
Codify the assistant architecture as a reusable internal product pattern
Create a briefing generation framework that can be adapted for other domains (e.g. onboarding, procurement, incident response)
Offer a lightweight assistant kit to teams facing similar workflow pain
🎯 Goal: Turn what worked in one context into a pattern — but only if the demand and maturity support it
Each Step Beyond 1.0 Still Follows the Same Rule: Prove It
Post-1.0, it’s tempting to grow faster, add features, or “productize” too soon. But the Value Step Method keeps you grounded. You don’t add unless the last step is adopted. You don’t expand unless the next workflow is real. And you don’t generalize until the use case has been proven in more than one place.
More is only better if it’s earned.
Final Thoughts: Adoption Is the Outcome That Matters
The hardest part about building internal AI products isn’t the model, or the integrations, or even the workflow mapping. It’s building something that people actually choose to use.
And not just once, out of curiosity — but every day, because it quietly makes their work easier.
That’s what adoption really means. It’s not feature usage. It’s not click-through rates. It’s when a subject matter expert says, “I rely on this now.” And in internal environments, that kind of adoption has to be earned, one step at a time.
The Value Step Method helps you do exactly that. It grounds your AI product decisions in reality — in the shape of real workflows, the weight of actual effort, and the friction that professionals already feel in their day-to-day work. It gives you a way to focus. A way to say no to unnecessary features. A way to align stakeholders around what matters right now, not what might matter in six months if everything goes perfectly.
And just as importantly, it gives you a way to measure real progress. Not by how much you’ve built, but by how much value you’ve delivered — and how deeply that value has embedded itself into the organization.
So if you're building internal AI products, the job isn’t to chase completeness. It’s to find that one step, in that one workflow, where AI can reduce friction in a way that builds trust.
Then you do it again.
And again.
And you stop when the product is truly part of how work gets done.
JBK 🕊️
Wow, this is an absolutely brilliant breakdown! The "Value Step Iteration" method is the one step that will make users trust the product, one workflow at a time. Kudos to you!