Priority Comparison Techniques

As Business Analysts, we often face a mountain of stakeholder requirements—but not all can be delivered at once due to time, budget, or resource constraints. That’s where requirement prioritization techniques come in—to help teams focus on what delivers maximum value first. 👇 Here are 7 practical techniques I use (with real-world examples): 1️⃣ MoSCoW Technique (Must, Should, Could, Won’t) ✅ Used in: Agile projects with tight sprints. Example: In a mobile banking app, Must: User login and money transfer Should: View recent transactions Could: Set custom notifications Won’t: Currency conversion (for this release) 👉 Helps align delivery with MVP scope. 2️⃣ Kano Model ✅ Used in: Product feature analysis based on user satisfaction. Example: For a food delivery app: Basic Needs: Track order, payment integration Performance Needs: Fast delivery, real-time tracking Delighters: AI-based food recommendations 👉 Helps differentiate must-haves from innovation drivers. 3️⃣ Value vs. Complexity Matrix ✅ Used in: Sprint planning or roadmap decisions. Example: In a healthcare dashboard: High Value, Low Effort: Show patient vitals summary High Value, High Effort: Integration with wearable devices Low Value, High Effort: Dark mode for admin panel 👉 Focus first on quick wins and high-impact items. 4️⃣ WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First) ✅ Used in: SAFe (Scaled Agile) environments. Formula: WSJF = (User/Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction) / Job Size Example: In a regulatory compliance portal, WSJF helps prioritize GDPR compliance (high risk reduction, medium effort) over UI enhancement (low risk, high effort) 👉 Promotes economic decision-making in large programs. 5️⃣ 100-Dollar Test ✅ Used in: Stakeholder workshops How it works: Stakeholders are given “$100” to allocate across features based on value. Example: In a CRM tool upgrade: Lead Scoring: $40 Email Automation: $30 Social Media Integration: $20 Custom Dashboard: $10 👉 Useful for collaborative and quantifiable feedback. 6️⃣ RICE Scoring (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) ✅ Used in: Product-led companies and SaaS prioritization. Example: For a subscription service platform: Reach: Will it affect many users? Impact: How much will it improve their experience? Confidence: How sure are we of success? Effort: How many hours/weeks of work? 👉 Ideal for objective scoring and backlog management. 7️⃣ Eisenhower Matrix (Urgent vs. Important) ✅ Used in: Time-sensitive, operational projects. Example: In IT Service Management tool enhancement: Urgent & Important: Fix for ticket assignment bug Not Urgent but Important: Knowledge base restructuring Urgent but Not Important: Color change in UI Neither: Feature used by very few users 👉 Great for visual prioritization and firefighting tasks. 🎯 Key Takeaway Prioritization isn't just about ranking features. It’s about strategic decision-making that balances value, effort, risk, and urgency—all while keeping stakeholders aligned. BA Helpline

Recruiters! dont you love it when all your open roles are P1 emergencies? “Mission-critical.” “Needed yesterday.” Here's a fix 👇 If everything is a priority, then nothing is. And it’s costing your business money, time, and trust in TA. I see this all the time during headcount planning: 50 live roles. 49 of them tagged as P1. And five different execs all asking: “Why aren’t the two recruiters we didn't lay off last year working my roles like the P1s they are?” Here’s how to fix it: - Create a shared definition of priority. - Use a simple decision tree everyone agrees on. You can even build it straight into your role request form. Here’s an example framework you can steal from me: Priority 1 - Business Critical Ask: Is the business missing a critical function without this role? If yes - it’s P1. Examples: Compliance or audit deadlines Meeting legal or regulatory obligations Keeping the product or platform functioning Priority 2 - Commercial or Product Roadmap Dependency Ask: Are our technical or product roadmaps, release dates, or commercial targets unachievable without this role? If yes -it’s P2. Examples: Launching a key product feature Delivering on a signed client commitment Achieving revenue milestones Priority 3 - Team-Level Objectives Ask: Are an individual team’s agreed goals at risk without this role? If yes - it’s P3. Examples: Increasing bandwidth or reducing burnout Team restructures or backfills Internal team goals (not business-critical) Priority 4 - Everything Else If none of the above? It’s a nice-to-have. Examples: Opportunistic or exploratory hires Roles without clear scope or timing Back-pocket reqs How to implement it: 1. Get your founders or execs to sign off on the framework. 2. Add the questions into your role request form 3. Assign priority based on those answers. That way your stakeholders aren't event asked the priority, they just have to use their discretion to answer the above questions and priority is assigned programatically, not gut feel. And leadership can always adjust any edge cases. Now you’ve got a consistent decision tree recruiters can plan resources better and forecast time to hire better. Now your stakeholders know how priorities actually work. Below is a free flowchart to get you started. How about you? Does this resonate? Tell me in the comments!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi 👋 I’m Luke. I empower recruiters with data. Want to get data-driven for free? Link in my profile for my weekly newsletter. #recruitment #talentacquisition #recruiters #recruiting

Out of the box, Jira offers up five different priorities for any given ticket, which implies five different classes of service. Since the option is there, many teams will use all of them at different times. A class of service reflects the fact that we behave differently for each. That we give more focus and attention to a high priority item than we do to a lower priority item. The five Jira priorities that we get out of the box are: 1. Highest 2. High 3. Medium (the default) 4. Low 5. Lowest Let’s assume that we use all five because realistically, if the option is there then people will use it. It’s reasonable to assume that most items will be the default (Medium) and will stay there. Given that, what’s the likelihood that we’ll ever do Low or Lowest priority items? If we’re honest with ourselves, it’s unlikely that we’ll ever run out of Medium items so the Low and Lowest items should starve for attention. That begs the question of why we ever allowed a Low or Lowest priority items to even move onto the board in the first place. Why would we ever start it, if we know we’ll never give it any attention? Clearly we shouldn’t so those two are redundant and could be safely removed. Yet, when we look at data from actual teams, we see that Low and Lowest items do get started, even when they haven’t run out of Medium items. What does that tell us about how we use priorities? It means we largely ignore them; we treat them as hints, not rules. In fact, if we graph cycletimes across priorities, we see that the more priorities are in use, the less difference they seem to make. When we only have two priorities, we can clearly see that the higher priority items get done faster than the lower priority ones. When we have five, it’s very difficult to see any correlation between priority and time to complete. So what do I recommend instead? Have only two priorities: standard and expedited. If it’s a standard priority then treat all work first-in, first-out. Older items are more important than younger items. If it’s expedited then it’s more important than any standard item so do that first. If you have multiple expedited items then do them in first-in, first-out order as well. Having only two levels reduces all the complexity, while still giving us a way to boost an item that needs it. The vast majority of items should be normal priority. Of course, even having two priorities doesn’t solve all the problems. We’ll still have situations where what we say doesn’t match our actions. If an item is expedited then we should be jumping on it and doing it first, yet we routinely see things marked as expedited and then everyone working on other non-expedited work instead. That’s like an ambulance on the highway putting its lights and sirens on and then stopping to let other people pass it. Behaviours need to match labels; if the lights are on, it should be moving before anyone else. If we mark an item as expedited, we need to do it before anything else.

Most PMs are prioritizing the wrong things. It’s not about building the most features. 𝗜𝘁’𝘀 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘀. When everything feels urgent, the real skill is choosing what 𝘯𝘰𝘵 to do. Here are quick, proven techniques to simplify your prioritization process: 🚦 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗴 𝗽𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 → Mission: Why does this product exist? → Vision: Where are we headed? → Strategy: What will get us there? → Goals: What matters 𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘸? → Metrics: What do we measure to stay on track? But the real challenge? Balancing speed, strategy, and stakeholder alignment. My top 5 frameworks to help you navigate a backlog: 🟢 𝗥𝗜𝗖𝗘 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 Evaluate projects based on: ↳ Reach: How many users will it impact? ↳ Impact: What’s the effect on each user? ↳ Confidence: How sure are we about our estimates? ↳ Effort: How much time will it take? RICE score: (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort 🟢 𝗪𝗦𝗝𝗙 (𝗪𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗝𝗼𝗯 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁) WSJF helps you build what’s most valuable—fast: ↳ Job Size: How big or complex is the work ↳ Cost of Delay = User-Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction / Opportunity Enablement WSJF Score = Cost of Delay ÷ Job Size 🟢 𝗠𝗼𝗦𝗖𝗼𝗪 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱 This method clarifies priorities and sets expectations: ↳ Must have: Essential features. ↳ Should have: Important but not critical. ↳ Could have: Nice to have. ↳ Won’t have: Not for this time. 🟢 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝘃𝘀. 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅 Plot your initiatives on a 2x2 grid: ↳ High Value, Low Complexity: Quick wins. ↳ High Value, High Complexity: Strategic projects. ↳ Low Value, Low Complexity: Fill-ins. ↳ Low Value, High Complexity: Time sinks. 🟢 𝗞𝗮𝗻𝗼 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹 Classify features based on customer satisfaction: ↳ Must-be: Basic expectations. ↳ Performance: More is better. ↳ Attractive: Delightful surprises. The best product teams don’t rely on a single technique. They blend methods based on goals, clarity, and team dynamics. Let’s stop guessing and start building smarter. 📌 𝗪𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗸𝗱𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀? Product Map dives deeper with clear examples and resources. Here is the link to the detailed guide on Prioritization 👇 https://lnkd.in/e2tQCiHp ♻️ Repost to share the value. 📩 Which technique works best for your team? Let’s discuss this in comments!

Struggling with Agile Prioritization? Are you struggling to prioritize tasks in your Agile workflow? Effective prioritization is crucial for maximizing team efficiency, optimizing your Agile workflow and delivering maximum value to your customers. Here's a breakdown of six powerful frameworks to supercharge your prioritization process: 1️⃣ MoSCoW Model: A simple yet effective way to categorize tasks or features based on their importance: ·       Must-Have: Critical for success. Without these, the project fails. ·       Should-Have: Important but not urgent. Can be delivered later. ·       Could-Have: Nice to include if time allows. ·       Won’t-Have: Out of scope for now. ·       Use this model to align teams on priorities and avoid scope creep.   2️⃣ Kano Model: Focuses on customer satisfaction by classifying features into: ·       Delighters: WOW factors that exceed expectations. ·       Performance Features: The more, the better. ·       Basic Needs: Essential features—if missing, users will be unhappy. ·       This model ensures you're not just meeting expectations but exceeding them.   3️⃣ RICE Method: ·       A data-driven formula to calculate priority: (Reach x Impact x Confidence) / Effort = RICE ·       Higher RICE scores indicate higher priority. ·       This method considers the reach (number of users impacted), impact (value delivered), confidence (certainty of estimates), and effort (time required). ·       This method helps you focus on high-impact, low-effort tasks.   4️⃣ Eisenhower Matrix: ·       Sort tasks based on urgency and importance: ·       Do Now: Urgent & important. ·       Plan: Important but not urgent. ·       Delegate: Urgent but not important. ·       Drop: Neither urgent nor important. ·       A classic tool for time management and decision-making.   5️⃣ Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF): ·       Prioritize work based on value, urgency, and effort ·       Calculate WSJF: (Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction) / Job Duration. ·       Higher WSJF scores signify higher priority. ·       This method is ideal for revenue-generating or compliance-driven features.   6️⃣ Cost of Delay: ·       Quantify the financial impact of delaying a feature: ·       Helps answer: “How much money are we losing every day we don’t release this?” ·       Ideal for revenue-generating or time-sensitive features. 💡 Pro Tip: ·       Combine these frameworks to create a prioritization strategy tailored to your team’s goals. ·       For example, use the MoSCoW Model for scope management, the RICE Method for data-driven decisions, and the Eisenhower Matrix for daily task management. Which of these techniques will you try first? Let me know in the comments below 👇 #Agile #Prioritization #Productivity #Leadership #ProjectManagement #BusinessGrowth

Comprehensive list of requirements prioritization techniques. ⸻ 1. MoSCoW Method Categories: Must Have, Should Have, Could Have, Won’t Have Pros: Simple and widely used in Agile; good for MVP planning Cons: Can be subjective without clear criteria; often overused Use Case: Sprint planning, product release scoping ⸻ 2. Kano Model Categories: Basic, Performance, Excitement Pros: Focuses on customer satisfaction; helps discover delight features Cons: Requires surveys and analysis; not ideal for time-sensitive prioritization Use Case: UX-focused feature analysis, customer satisfaction projects ⸻ 3. 100-Point Method Approach: Stakeholders allocate 100 points across features Pros: Democratic and transparent; balances stakeholder input Cons: Can be time-consuming and biased if stakeholders are misaligned Use Case: Collaborative planning with multiple departments ⸻ 4. Value vs. Complexity Matrix Approach: Plot features based on business value and technical complexity Pros: Visual, quick to evaluate; helps identify low-hanging fruits Cons: Requires accurate complexity/value estimations Use Case: Roadmapping, early feature planning ⸻ 5. Pairwise Comparison Approach: Compare features in pairs to determine priority Pros: Thorough and logical; works well with small sets Cons: Not scalable for large numbers of features Use Case: Detailed scope prioritization in early-stage analysis ⸻ 6. Bubble Sort or Ranking Method Approach: Rank features from most to least important Pros: Simple and easy for stakeholders to grasp Cons: Lacks depth; not suitable for large or complex projects Use Case: Small teams with clear project goals ⸻ 7. WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First) Formula: WSJF = Value / Duration Pros: Useful in Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe); considers time to market Cons: Requires estimation of both value and duration Use Case: Agile portfolios, SAFe environments ⸻ 8. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Approach: Uses structured pairwise comparisons with a scoring mechanism Pros: Highly accurate and systematic Cons: Very time-consuming and complex Use Case: High-stakes decision-making, enterprise systems

Unclear and conflicting priorities can disrupt your timeline and cause product delays. If you want to do everything at once, you won’t be able to do anything. Instead, focus on the most critical items and add everything else in the backlog to consider later. There are many prioritization frameworks available to help you. Pick one of the frameworks, define your criteria, and score and rank all the items. Let’s dive in, 1. MoSCoW Method The MoSCoW method helps you categorize tasks into Must Have, Should Have, Could Have, and Won’t Have. This framework is crucial because it ensures you focus on the most critical features first. To use this method, list all your tasks and classify them into these four categories to prioritize essential features and address less critical ones later. 2. RICE Scoring Model The RICE model evaluates tasks based on Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. (Reach * Impact * Confidence) / Effort = RICE Score List all the features and assign scores to each criterion, then calculate the RICE score to rank them. This method is effective because it quantifies the potential value (impact) and effort required for each feature. 3. Kano Model The Kano model differentiates between basic features, performance features, and delighters. Researcher Noraki Kano developed it to help product managers prioritize features and updates based on customer needs. This framework is important because it helps you understand what features will meet basic user needs and which ones will exceed expectations. 4. Value vs. Effort Matrix The Value vs. Effort Matrix helps you plot features on a 2x2 grid based on their value and the effort required. This visualization makes it easy to identify high-value, low-effort items. Plot each feature on the matrix and focus on those in the high-value, low-effort quadrant. This ensures that you’re investing your resources in the most efficient way possible. 5. Weighted Scoring Weighted Scoring involves assigning weights to different criteria based on their importance and scoring each feature accordingly. Define your criteria, assign weights, and score each feature to prioritize those that score the highest. 6. Cost of Delay The cost of Delay evaluates the economic impact of delaying each feature. This approach helps you prioritize features that, if delayed, would result in significant financial loss. Calculate the cost of delay for each feature and prioritize those with the highest cost to minimize financial impact. 7. Opportunity Scoring Opportunity Scoring focuses on identifying opportunities based on customer needs and the difficulty of meeting those needs. By following these frameworks, you’ll be well on your way to effective prioritization in product development. Work on the highest priority items and avoid spending efforts on less important work. This will help you stay focused, avoid unnecessary work, and ensure timely product launches.

In Agile, everything feels important, but not everything should be prioritized equally. Without a structured approach, teams can get stuck in endless debates or focus on the wrong tasks. Here are 7 proven Agile prioritization techniques to help you decide what truly matters: 1️⃣ 𝗠𝗼𝗦𝗖𝗼𝗪 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱 A simple way to categorize tasks based on necessity: ✅ Must-Have – Critical for project success. No compromise. 🔹 Should-Have – Important but not mandatory. Can wait if needed. 🔹 Could-Have – Nice to have, but won’t impact the project much. ❌ Won’t-Have – Out of scope for now. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Quick and easy prioritization of backlog items. 2️⃣ 𝗞𝗮𝗻𝗼 𝗠𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹 Classifies features based on how users perceive value: 🌟 Delighters – Unexpected features that wow users. ✅ Performance Needs – The better they are, the happier users are. 🔹 Basic Needs – Expected and essential. Missing them = unhappy users. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Understanding customer satisfaction drivers. 3️⃣ 𝗥𝗜𝗖𝗘 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 A data-driven framework that scores tasks based on four factors: 📈 Reach – How many users will this impact? 🎯 Impact – How much will it benefit them? ⚡ Confidence – How sure are we about the impact? ⏳ Effort – How much time/resources are needed? 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘂𝗹𝗮: (𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗰𝗵 × 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 × 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲) / 𝗘𝗳𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘁 ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Prioritizing features based on measurable impact. 4️⃣ 𝗘𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝗿𝗶𝘅 A productivity framework that separates tasks by urgency and importance: ✅ Urgent & Important – Do it now. 🔹 Important but Not Urgent – Plan for it. 🔥 Urgent but Not Important – Delegate it. ❌ Neither Urgent nor Important – Drop it. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Managing daily work and preventing burnout. 5️⃣ 𝗪𝗦𝗝𝗙 (𝗪𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗦𝗵𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗝𝗼𝗯 𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁) A formula-based method used in SAFe Agile: (Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction) / Job Duration ⏩ A high WSJF score means the work should be done sooner rather than later. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Maximizing economic impact in scaled Agile frameworks. 6️⃣ 𝗖𝗼𝘀𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝗗𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘆 (𝗖𝗼𝗗) ⏳ Prioritize based on the financial impact of delaying a feature. 💸 Helps answer: “How much money are we losing every day we don’t release this?” 🔥 Particularly useful for revenue-generating or compliance-driven features. ➡ 𝗕𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿: Ensuring the highest ROI on time-sensitive projects.

35% of startups fail due to a simple lack of market need. Here’s how your climate tech platform can avoid this fate with your MVP: I'm going to use Aurora Solar's a cloud-based software offering for designing and selling solar installations to explain 7 different techniques for prioritizing a feature set for your MVP. 1.User Story Mapping User stories help visualize the user's journey and match product features with different needs. A user story might be: As a solar installer I want to quickly and accurately design solar panel layouts for different roof types So that I can improve proposal turnaround times and win more bids Corresponding Feature: Automated roof measurement and panel layout generation 2.MoSCoW Method This method categorizes features as: Must-Have (essential functionalities like roof modeling). Should-Have (important but not deal-breakers like collaboration tools). Could-Have (nice-to-haves like like financial reports). Won't-Have (features for future iterations like integration with specific hardware). 3.Eisenhower Matrix This matrix is a simple four-quadrant approach: Urgent and Important features (accurate solar panel placement) go into the "Do First" quadrant. Not urgent, but important features (bug fixes) would be "Schedule." Urgent but unimportant features (user interface) go to "Delegate." Non-urgent and unimportant features (detailed weather forecasts) go into "Eliminate." 4.RICE Scoring Model This assigns each feature a score based on: Reach (number of users impacted) Impact (business value) Confidence (certainty of success) Effort (development cost) RICE score = Reach x Impact x Confidence / Effort While real-time solar data might score higher on reach (will be used by all), energy generation prediction might score more on impact (affects user satisfaction more). 5.Kano Model This categorizes features as: Basic (expected by users) → panel efficiency calculations. Performance (satisfaction increases with improved functionality) → advanced shading analysis. Excitement (delighters that exceed expectations) → VR visualization. 6.Impact-Effort Matrix: This graph helps decide features only based on their potential impact and development effort. High Impact, Low Effort: User-friendly interface and clear performance metrics. High Impact, High Effort: Advanced simulation capabilities and integration with local utility data. Low Impact, Low Effort: Minor UI enhancements or additional report formats. Low Impact, High Effort: Features with limited user benefit and high development costs (e.g., niche solar panel compatibility). 7.Feature Buckets Features are grouped based on their function (design tools, reporting tools). This maintains a balanced MVP – keeps the core functionality but tries to include different user needs. In each case, the same critical step comes next: taking in all the user feedback and iterating rigorously. — What other frameworks do you find helpful for prioritizing your product features?