In the last couple of years, I’ve really embraced prioritisation frameworks. Let’s have a look at what they are, when you’d use them and why they’re useful.

What’s a prioritisation framework?

The reality of today is that we can never get everything done. Priorities shift, resources can be scarce or move, even funding is scarce, especially as we start to face into a worldwide recession. Even though we often have direction in our projects on our priorities, you may find that you’re increasingly having to also do this yourself. And, we need to start prioritising our work.

A prioritisation framework is a disciplined way of evaluating the relative importance of work (even other things, like ideas and requests) and understanding how we might prioritise our resources around them (especially people & time).

When to use a prioritisation framework

I’d almost frame this as being “when would you NOT use a prioritisation framework”?! Prioritisation frameworks are useful in scenarios where you need to prioritise a variety of “items”. These could range from research questions, user segments, and features to ideas, and tasks.

Why prioritisation frameworks are useful

Prioritisation frameworks are a fantastic way to summarise or communicate prioritisation decisions to stakeholders, especially Product Owners. Quite often decisions are made without a scorecard approach, and when this happens, our end users are often excluded in the decision.

How to choose the right framework

The great news is that Andrew Quan has done all the hard work for you! He has created a brilliant article on prioritisation frameworks and how to choose them. This not only provides a great overview on different prioritisation frameworks but also helps you pick which one may be right for you.

The frameworks he runs through in the article includes:

  • Cost of Delay and Weighted Shortest Job First [WSJF]

  • Cost vs Benefit (Weighted Score) [COBE]

  • ICE Scoring and RICE Scoring [RICE]

  • Kano Model [KANO]

  • Buy-a-Feature [BUYF]

  • Story Mapping [STMP]

  • Opportunity Scoring [OPPS]

  • Affinity Grouping [AFFY]

  • Impact Mapping [IMP]

  • MoSCoW Analysis [MSCW]

  • Value vs Complexity [VCC]

  • Eisenhower Matrix [EIS]

The frameworks were categorised into 2 main areas:

  • The level of end-user validation needed (ie. a data gathering or hypothesis validation exercise) on the inputs to the prioritization framework used and

  • The degree to which prioritisation method inputs are highly qualitative (low score) or quantitative (high score) in nature.

Product Prioritization Frameworks Mapped

Note: the colour coded sections relate to the level of complexity and difficulty in implementing each method.

The biggest takeaway?

Overall, prioritization frameworks can really help individuals and organisations to make more informed, strategic decisions about how to allocate their resources and achieve their goals. For designers in particular, they can provide a structured approach to evaluate and compare options and tasks, and help identify the option that will provide the greatest value and impact.