Best Prioritization Frameworks for Product Teams

Prioritization frameworks are like a box of chocolates - each one offers a unique flavor and texture, and choosing the right one can make all the difference. 

How do you pick the right one? 

Just as you would savor each chocolate before finding your favorite, this article invites you to explore the unique aspects of each framework. 

Let’s discover that special framework that best suits your team’s needs.

What is a prioritization framework?

A prioritization framework is a structured approach that helps product teams rank tasks or features based on their value and impact. It’s like a roadmap that guides teams through the complex landscape of decision-making, ensuring that their focus remains steadfastly on the product’s goals.

Benefits of using prioritization frameworks

Prioritization frameworks are the unsung heroes of product development. 

They bring order to chaos, transforming a jumbled list of tasks into a clear, actionable plan. 

They help teams distinguish between what’s urgent and what’s important, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently. 

With a prioritization framework, teams can:

• make informed decisions, 
• avoid the pitfalls of multitasking, and 
• steer their product towards success.

18 Most Popular Prioritization Frameworks: KANO, MoSCoW method & more

Specially for you, we’ve crafted a curated list of the top prioritization frameworks. 

Just so that you can take advantage of all the perks we’ve just mentioned - and more.

Framework 1: RICE score

RICE stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. 

It’s a comprehensive prioritization technique that takes into account 4 different aspects. Those are the potential reach of a feature, its impact on users, the team’s confidence in its success, and the effort required to implement it.

✅ Pros: RICE offers a balanced perspective, considering both the potential benefits and the resources needed

❌ Cons: The subjective nature of some of its components, like Impact and Confidence, can lead to bias and inconsistency

🔍 Use case: RICE is particularly useful for teams that need to balance the potential impact of a feature against the resources required to implement it. 

For instance, a feature that has a high reach and impact, but requires minimal effort, would be a top priority among your product decisions.

Or, if you’re developing a new feature for an e-commerce website, such as a recommendation engine, you might estimate its:

• Reach (number of users it will affect), 
• Impact (how much it will improve the customer experience), 
• Confidence (how sure you are of your estimates), and 
• Effort (how many resources it will take to implement). 

A high score in Reach, Impact, and Confidence, combined with a low Effort score, would make this feature a top priority.

Framework 2: MoSCoW

The MoSCoW framework categorizes features into four buckets: Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won’t have.

✅ Pros:  It’s a straightforward approach that can help product managers distinguish between the non-negotiables and the nice-to-haves

❌ Cons: The simplicity of MoSCoW can sometimes oversimplify complex decisions, leading to potential oversights

🔍 Use case: MoSCoW is ideal for teams working under tight deadlines or with limited resources. It should be used when it’s crucial to identify the must-have features and deliver the most basic product vision.

If you’re redesigning a mobile app, you might categorize:

• a new user interface as a “Must have”, 
• push notifications as a “Should have”, 
• a chat feature as a “Could have”, and 
• a virtual reality feature as a “Won’t have”.

Framework 3: Kano Model

source

The Kano Model classifies features based on how they influence customer satisfaction. It differentiates between basic features, performance features, and delighters.

✅ Pros: This customer-centric approach helps teams build products that resonate with users

❌ Cons: It relies on a deep understanding of customer value needs and expectations, which can be challenging to get and interpret

🔍 Use case: The Kano Model is perfect for teams looking to enhance user satisfaction. 

For instance, a team might focus on improving basic features to prevent dissatisfaction, while also introducing delighters to exceed user expectations.

Or, if you’re developing a music streaming app: 

• basic features might include a wide selection of songs (expected by users), 
• performance features might include high audio quality (satisfies users more as it improves), and 
• delighters might include personalized playlists (unexpected features that can delight users).

Framework 4: Value vs. Complexity Matrix

The Value vs. Complexity Matrix plots features based on their value to the business and the complexity of implementing them.

✅ Pros: It’s a product prioritization framework that helps teams identify low-hanging fruits and resource-intensive tasks

❌ Cons: It relies heavily on accurate estimation of value and complexity, which can be tricky to nail down

🔍 Use case: This matrix is useful for teams that need to balance the business value of a feature against the complexity of implementing it. 

A feature that delivers high value but has low complexity would be a top priority.

Alternatively, if you’re working on a digital marketing campaign, you might plot tasks like:

• creating a new landing page (high value, low complexity), 
• launching a PR campaign (high value, high complexity), 
• updating the website copy (low value, low complexity), and 
• redesigning the logo (low value, high complexity) on the matrix.

Framework 5: Opportunity Scoring

Opportunity Scoring measures the gap between customer expectations and their satisfaction with current solutions.

✅ Pros: It’s an excellent tool for identifying unmet needs and untapped opportunities

❌ Cons: It calls for robust customer feedback mechanisms and the ability to interpret and act on this feedback

🔍 Use case: Opportunity Scoring is ideal for teams looking to innovate and stay ahead of the competition. It can help identify areas where current solutions are falling short of customer expectations, providing opportunities for innovation.

Provided that you’re running a SaaS business, you might use customer feedback to:

• identify opportunities like improving the onboarding process (high expectation, low satisfaction) or 
• introducing a new integration (low expectation, low satisfaction).

Framework 6: Weighted Scoring

Weighted Scoring is a versatile methodology that allows teams to assign weights to different criteria and score features accordingly.

✅ Pros: It’s highly customizable, allowing teams to define their own criteria and weights based on their unique needs

❌ Cons: It demands careful selection and weighting of criteria to avoid bias and ensure fair scoring

🔍 Use case: Weighted Scoring is suitable for teams that have multiple criteria to consider and need a flexible framework to accommodate them. 

A team might consider criteria like:

• user impact, 
• cost, 
• risk, and 
• strategic alignment 

when scoring features. 

A feature that has a high user impact, low cost, low risk, and high strategic alignment would receive a high score and be a top priority.

Framework 7: Cost of Delay

source

Cost of Delay is a technique that helps teams understand the financial impact of delaying work on a feature.

✅ Pros: It brings a financial perspective to prioritization, helping teams understand the opportunity cost of their decisions

❌ Cons: It needs accurate estimation of costs and benefits, which can be challenging

🔍 Use case: Cost of Delay is suitable for teams working on high-stakes projects where delays can have a significant financial impact. 

In a fast-paced market, delaying work on a key feature could mean losing out to competitors.

Imagine you’re launching a new product. Then, you might calculate the cost of delaying tasks like market research, product development, marketing, and distribution. Tasks with a high cost of delay would be prioritized.

Framework 8: Eisenhower Matrix

The Eisenhower Matrix, also known as the Urgent-Important Matrix, helps teams prioritize tasks based on their urgency and importance.

✅ Pros: It’s a simple, effective tool for managing time and avoiding the trap of “busy work”

❌ Cons: It may oversimplify complex decisions and overlook the interdependencies between tasks

🔍 Use case: The Eisenhower Matrix is ideal for teams struggling with the time aspect of product management. It helps distinguish between tasks that require immediate attention and those that can be scheduled for later.

If you’re managing a project, you might categorize tasks like:

• meeting a client (urgent and important), 
• training a team member (not urgent but important), 
• answering emails (urgent but not important), and 
• organizing a team outing (neither urgent nor important).

Framework 9: PIE

PIE stands for Potential, Importance, and Ease. It’s a model commonly used in Conversion Rate Optimization (CRO) to prioritize tests and improvements.

✅ Pros: It gives a balanced view of the potential benefit, importance, and ease of implementation

❌ Cons: It may not be suitable for complex projects with multiple stakeholders and dependencies

🔍 Use case: PIE is perfect for teams focusing on CRO. It helps identify tests and improvements that could potentially deliver the biggest impact on conversion rates

If you’re optimizing a website, you might score tests looking at:

• the Potential to improve the conversion rate, 
• the Importance of the page or element being tested, and 
• the Ease of implementing the test. 

A test with high Potential, high Importance, and high Ease would be a top priority for you.

Framework 10: ICE

ICE stands for Impact, Confidence, and Ease. It’s a popular framework in growth hacking to prioritize growth ideas.

✅ Pros: It delivers a balanced view of the potential impact, confidence in the hypothesis, and ease of implementation

❌ Cons: The subjective nature of some of its components can lead to bias and inconsistency

🔍 Use case: ICE is ideal for growth teams looking to prioritize their growth ideas. It helps identify ideas that are likely to have a high impact, have a high degree of confidence, and are easy to implement.

When brainstorming growth ideas, you can score ideas looking through the prism of:

• their potential Impact on key metrics, 
• your Confidence in the idea, and 
• the Ease of implementation. 

An idea with high Impact, high Confidence, and high Ease would be a top priority.

Framework 11: User Story Mapping

User Story Mapping is a collaborative framework that arranges user stories based on their sequence or flow in the user journey.

✅ Pros: It provides a visual representation of the user journey, helping teams understand the big picture and prioritize features that enhance the user experience.

❌ Cons: It requires a deep understanding of the user journey, which can be challenging to obtain and interpret.

🔍 Use case: User Story Mapping is ideal for teams focusing on user experience. For example, a team might prioritize features that smooth out friction points in the user journey.

As a travel booking app developer, a user story map can aid you in visualizing the user’s journey from searching for flights to making a booking. 

This can help you identify key features to prioritize, such as a flexible search function or a streamlined booking process.

Framework 12: QFD (Quality Function Deployment)

QFD is a structured approach to defining customer needs or requirements and translating them into specific plans to produce products to meet those needs.

✅ Pros: It’s a customer-first approach that helps teams build products that resonate with users

❌ Cons: It requires a significant amount of time, effort, and resources from various stakeholders within an organization

🔍 Use case: QFD is perfect for teams looking to enhance user satisfaction. 

When you’re building a project management tool, QFD can help you translate user needs (like easy collaboration or effective task tracking) into specific product features.

Framework 13: Buy a Feature

Buy a Feature is a collaborative prioritization framework where stakeholders are given a set budget and asked to ‘buy’ their preferred features.

✅ Pros: It encourages stakeholder engagement and provides direct insight into what feature prioritization decisions should be made

❌ Cons: It may lead to a focus on short-term gains over long-term strategic goals

🔍 Use case: This framework is particularly useful when there are many stakeholders with different interests. 

If you’re developing a new CRM software, you might present a list of potential features to a group of stakeholders. Those could be the sales team, customer service, marketing and others. 

Then, give them a budget to ‘buy’ the features they think are most important. The features with the most ‘purchases’ become your top priorities.

Framework 14: Value Proposition Canvas

The Value Proposition Canvas is a framework that helps teams understand their customers’ needs and design products that meet those needs.

✅ Pros: It encourages a customer-centric approach to product development

❌ Cons: It requires a deep understanding of customer needs and expectations, which can be challenging to obtain and interpret

🔍 Use case: This framework is for those teams that want to ensure their product or feature development is closely aligned with customer needs.

A fitness app developer can use the Value Proposition Canvas to map out their customers’ needs (like tracking workouts, setting fitness goals, etc.) and design features that meet those needs.

Framework 15: Theme Scoring

Theme Scoring is a prioritization framework where themes (or groups of related tasks) are scored based on a set of criteria.

✅ Pros: It allows for a more holistic view of tasks and can help ensure strategic alignment

❌ Cons: It may be less effective when tasks within a theme vary greatly in terms of value or effort

🔍 Use case: This framework is particularly useful for larger projects where tasks can be grouped into themes.

When working on a website redesign, you might group tasks into themes like ‘User Experience’, ‘Content’, and ‘SEO’. 

Each theme is then scored based on criteria like potential impact, effort, and strategic alignment.

Framework 16: Story Mapping

Story Mapping is a prioritization method that arranges user stories along a narrative flow, helping teams understand the bigger picture.

✅ Pros: It offers a visual representation of the user journey and helps ensure a good user experience

❌ Cons: It may be less effective for non-user-facing tasks

🔍 Use case: This framework is ideal for teams working on user-facing products or features.

If you’re developing a new onboarding process for your app, you might use Story Mapping to arrange user stories along the onboarding journey. 

This will aid you in seeing how each story fits into the overall user experience and prioritize accordingly.

Framework 17: WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First)

source

WSJF is a prioritization framework used in Agile and Lean software development to order jobs (features, capabilities, etc.) by their ‘cost of delay’ divided by job size.

✅ Pros: It allows teams effectively prioritize jobs that deliver the most value in the shortest time

❌ Cons: It requires accurate estimation of ‘cost of delay’ and job size, which can be challenging

🔍 Use case: This framework is particularly useful in Agile or Lean development environments where work is broken down into small, manageable ‘jobs’.

As somebody working in an Agile software development team, you might use WSJF to prioritize jobs in your backlog. 

Jobs with a high ‘cost of delay’ and a small size would be your top priorities.

Framework 18: Business Value-Agility Matrix

The Business Value-Agility Matrix is a framework that helps teams balance the business value of a task against its agility (or ease of implementation).

✅ Pros: It gives a balanced view of value and agility, helping teams prioritize high-value, low-effort tasks

❌ Cons: It needs accurate estimation of business value and agility, which can be challenging

🔍 Use case: The framework is particularly useful for teams that need to deliver quick wins while also focusing on high-value tasks.

If you’re managing a digital marketing campaign, you might use the Business Value-Agility Matrix to prioritize tasks like creating a new landing page (high value, high agility) over tasks like launching a PR campaign (high value, low agility).

Implementing LiveSession in your frameworks

When it comes to enhancing your prioritization frameworks, LiveSession is a tool that can provide valuable insights. 

LiveSession is an all-in-one platform for product and digital experience analytics. 

It helps product teams: 

• analyze users’ behavior,
• improve user experience, 
• find bugs, and 
• increase conversion rates using session replays and event-based product analytics.

LiveSession can be seamlessly integrated into your prioritization process.

It lets you understand how users interact with your application, identify crucial page elements, and detect any frustration signals on your page. 

With this tool, you can determine which features are directly addressing users’ needs and improve their satisfaction.

Conclusion

Just like finding your favorite chocolate in a box of assorted treats, discovering the right prioritization framework can be a game-changer. 

These frameworks are more than just tools - they are strategic allies.  

They bring clarity to complexity, transform chaos into order, and help product teams steer their ship towards the shores of success. 

We hope you found the one that hits the sweet spot for your team. 

And if you also add LiveSession, you’re set for success.

FAQs

What is a prioritization framework in product strategy?

A structured method to rank tasks based on value and impact, guiding the product manager’s decisions and product roadmap.

Why are prioritization frameworks important?

Prioritization frameworks bring order to the often chaotic process of product development. They help teams distinguish between what’s urgent and what’s important, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently. With a prioritization framework, teams can make informed decisions, avoid the pitfalls of multitasking, and steer their product towards success.

How to choose the right prioritization framework?

Choosing the right prioritization framework depends on your team’s unique needs and circumstances. Consider factors like the nature of your project, the resources at your disposal, and your team’s working style. Experiment with different frameworks and adapt them as needed until you find the one that works best for your team.

How to implement a prioritization framework?

Implementing a prioritization framework involves defining your criteria (like value, impact, or effort), ranking your tasks or features based on these criteria, and then using this ranking to guide your decision-making. Tools like LiveSession can provide valuable insights to inform your prioritization process.

Can I use multiple prioritization frameworks?

Yes, you can use multiple prioritization frameworks. In fact, it can be beneficial to do so. Different frameworks can provide different perspectives, and using more than one can help ensure a more balanced and comprehensive approach to prioritization.