As many professionals reflect upon their workflow and try to identify opportunities for enhancement, it becomes more and more obvious that in all processes, including product management, prioritization can be the growth point.

Poor prioritization can manifest in seemingly minor inconveniences, such as attempting to fit an excessive amount of work into a constrained timeframe – a predicament familiar to us all.

Nevertheless, when these challenges persist consistently, the cumulative effect transforms these minor stresses into significant obstacles, resulting in the creation of subpar products and an immense waste of valuable time.

The question then arises: how can one address prioritization challenges proactively, preventing them from evolving into significant hurdles?

In this article, we'll explore proven prioritization techniques that can help product managers and teams make informed decisions. Each method offers unique insights into product development.

The MoSCoW method sorts features into must-haves and nice-to-haves. The Kano Model focuses on customer satisfaction. The Eisenhower Matrix balances urgency and importance.

These methods together form a toolkit helping product teams handle challenges, allocate resources wisely, and create products that connect with their audience.

1.MoSCoW Method

The MoSCoW method was proposed by Dai Clegg of Oracle UK Consulting in the mid-1990s. It is an efficient way to sort tasks into critical and non-critical categories.

The MoSCoW acronym stands for:

Must-haves (M): These are the essential features or requirements without which the project or product would be considered a failure. They represent the core functionality that must be delivered for the project to be successful.

Should-haves (S): These are important features that are not critical for the project's success but would significantly enhance its value. They are prioritized after addressing the must-haves.

Could-haves (C): These are nice-to-have features that are desirable but not necessary for the project's success. They are typically considered after addressing must-haves and should-haves.

Won't-haves or Would-haves (W): These tasks are desirable (for example, "Would like to have…") but aren't included in this project. You can also use this category for the least critical activities.

Example of the MoSCoW Method

Imagine we are developing a new e-commerce website, so we will have the following prioritization list:

Must-haves (M): Secure online payment system, product listing and search functionality, user registration, and authentication.

Should-haves (S): Customer reviews and ratings, integration with social media for sharing products, wishlist functionality.

Could-haves (C): Loyalty program for frequent customers, real-time customer support chat, advanced search filters.

Won't-haves (W): Augmented reality features for virtual product try-on (considered too complex for the initial release), cryptocurrency payment options (considered a low priority at the moment).

By categorizing features into these four groups, the project team can ensure that they focus on the most critical elements first. We also get a clear understanding of what must be delivered and what can be considered as additional enhancements.

This helps in managing stakeholder expectations and resources effectively throughout the project lifecycle.

Additionally, the MoSCoW method allows for flexibility in adapting to changing project requirements and priorities.

2. The Kano Model

The Kano Model, developed by Professor Noriaki Kano, is a framework for understanding and prioritizing customer needs and expectations in product development. It categorizes features into three main types: Basic Needs, Performance Needs, and Excitement Needs. The model helps product teams identify which features will lead to increased customer satisfaction.

Basic Needs: Basic needs are fundamental requirements that, when met, do not necessarily increase customer satisfaction but can cause dissatisfaction if not fulfilled.

Performance Needs: Performance needs are features where the level of satisfaction is directly proportional to the degree of fulfillment. Meeting or exceeding expectations in these areas can positively impact satisfaction.

Excitement Needs (Delighters): Excitement needs are unexpected or innovative features that can significantly boost customer satisfaction when present but don't cause dissatisfaction if absent since customers don't expect them.

Example of the Kano Model

This time let us take the process of a Fitness App development. Our Basic Need is to accurately track steps and calories burned. Users expect the app to provide reliable data; if it consistently fails to do so, dissatisfaction will occur.

The Performance Need will be a personalized workout recommendation based on user preferences and goals. As the app tailors workout suggestions more accurately, user satisfaction increases.

The last one is the Excitement need — gamification features. It can be virtual rewards or challenges. These elements aren't necessary for the core functionality, but they can significantly enhance the user experience and satisfaction when present.

After completing the five-step method and having a prioritized list of features, you can enhance your planning by creating a benefit and cost model for each feature. This step allows you to identify features that, if implemented, could yield a substantial return on investment through increased sales.

This insight becomes particularly valuable in guiding your product development cycle, especially when facing constraints in time and financial resources.

3. The Eisenhower Matrix

The Eisenhower Matrix, also known as the Urgent-Important Matrix, is a productivity and prioritization tool named after former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who famously said, "I have two kinds of problems: the urgent and the important. The urgent are not important, and the important are never urgent." The matrix categorizes tasks into four quadrants based on their urgency and importance:

Urgent and Important (Do First): Tasks that are both urgent and important are given the highest priority and should be tackled immediately. These are critical tasks that have a significant impact on the project or product.

Important, Not Urgent (Schedule): Tasks in this quadrant are important for long-term goals but are not time-sensitive. They should be scheduled and planned so that they do not tend to become urgent in the future.

Urgent, Not Important (Delegate): Tasks that are urgent but not important can be delegated to others if possible. They may not directly contribute to the project's success but still need attention.

Not Urgent and Not Important (Eliminate or Postpone):Tasks in this quadrant are neither urgent nor important and can be postponed or eliminated. They do not contribute significantly to the project's success.

Example of the Eisenhower Matrix

Let's say a product manager is working on software for a customer relationship management (CRM) system. Here's how they might apply the Eisenhower Matrix to prioritize product requirements:

Urgent and Important (Do First): The CRM system has a critical security vulnerability that needs immediate attention to protect customer data. This becomes the top priority for the development team.

Important, Not Urgent (Schedule): Enhancing the user interface for a more intuitive user experience is important for customer satisfaction but not immediately urgent. The product manager schedules this task for the next development sprint.

Urgent, Not Important (Delegate): A minor bug in a less critical feature has been identified. The product manager delegates this task to a junior developer while they focus on more critical issues.

Not Urgent and Not Important (Eliminate or Postpone): A proposed feature that would add a decorative element to the user interface but doesn't contribute significantly to functionality is deemed not urgent and not important.

The product manager decides to postpone this feature until more critical tasks are addressed.

As can be seen, the Eisenhower Matrix is a simple tool for considering the long-term outcomes of your tasks and focusing on what will make the project most effective. It helps to visualize all the acute tasks in a matrix of urgent/important and provides that all tasks of a bigger project will fall into one of the above-mentioned four quadrants.

RICE Method

The RICE scoring method is a prioritization framework used to rank and prioritize features or tasks based on their potential impact. The acronym "RICE" stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. Each of these factors is assigned a numerical score, and the total score is used to determine the priority of a particular item.

Here's a breakdown of each component of the RICE method:

Reach: Reach measures the number of users or customers who will be affected by the feature or task. It quantifies the potential audience impacted by the implementation.

Scoring: Assign a numerical value from 1 to 10, with 1 being a low reach and 10 being a high reach. For example, if a feature affects all users, it might receive a score of 10.

Impact: Impact assesses the potential positive effect or benefit of implementing the feature or task. It quantifies the level of positive change or improvement.

Scoring: Similar to reach, assign a numerical value from 1 to 10. A feature that significantly improves user engagement or key performance indicators might receive a high impact score.

Confidence: Confidence reflects the level of certainty or confidence the team has in the estimates for reach, impact, and effort. It accounts for the level of uncertainty associated with the prioritization.

Scoring: Assign a percentage score from 1% to 100%. A feature with high confidence in the estimates might receive a score of 90%, while a more uncertain estimate might get a lower score, such as 50%.

Effort: Effort measures the resources, time, and complexity required to implement the feature or task. It quantifies the cost or effort associated with the implementation.

Scoring: Similar to reach and impact, assign a numerical value from 1 to 10, with 1 being low effort and 10 being high effort. A straightforward task might receive a low effort score, while a complex feature might receive a high effort score.

The RICE score is calculated using the formula:

(Reach x Impact x Confidence) / Effort.

Example of the RICE Method:

Now, we will try to prioritize features for an imaginable Mobile App using the RICE method. Let us compare Feature A and Feature B.

Conclusion

Each method in this compilation serves a common purpose: guaranteeing that your focus is consistently on the most crucial tasks. Ultimately, the specific technique chosen becomes secondary.

Whether you opt for a single method, combine various techniques, or even customize your approach by integrating aspects from different methods, the key is to choose an approach that resonates with your workflow and fits your product the most.

The paramount factor is taking action and initiating the work based on a method that aligns with your team's preferences and work style.