prioritization-advisor

Purpose

Guide product managers in choosing the right prioritization framework by asking adaptive questions about product stage, team context, decision-making needs, and stakeholder dynamics. Use this to avoid "framework whiplash" (switching frameworks constantly) or applying the wrong framework (e.g., using RICE for strategic bets or ICE for data-driven decisions). Outputs a recommended framework with implementation guidance tailored to your context.

This is not a scoring calculator -- it's a decision guide that matches prioritization frameworks to your specific situation.

Key Concepts

The Prioritization Framework Landscape

Scoring frameworks:

• RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) -- Data-driven, requires metrics
• ICE (Impact, Confidence, Ease) -- Lightweight, gut-check scoring
• Value vs. Effort (2x2 matrix) -- Quick wins vs. strategic bets
• Weighted Scoring -- Custom criteria with stakeholder input

Strategic frameworks:

• Kano Model -- Classify features by customer delight (basic, performance, delight)
• Opportunity Scoring -- Rate importance vs. satisfaction gap
• Buy-a-Feature -- Customer budget allocation exercise
• Moscow (Must, Should, Could, Won't) -- Forcing function for hard choices

Contextual frameworks:

• Cost of Delay -- Urgency-based (time-sensitive features)
• Impact Mapping -- Goal-driven (tie features to outcomes)
• Story Mapping -- User journey-based (narrative flow)

Anti-Patterns

• Not a universal ranking: Frameworks aren't "better" or "worse" -- they fit different contexts
• Not a replacement for strategy: Frameworks execute strategy; they don't create it
• Not set-it-and-forget-it: Reassess frameworks as your product matures

Facilitation Source of Truth

Use workshop-facilitation as the default interaction protocol for this skill.

It defines: session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess), one-question turns, progress labels, interruption handling, numbered recommendations at decision points, quick-select options.

This file defines the domain-specific assessment content. If there is a conflict, follow this file's domain logic.

Application

This interactive skill asks up to 4 adaptive questions, offering 3-4 enumerated options at each step.

Question 1: Product Stage

"What stage is your product in?"

1. Pre-product/market fit -- Searching for PMF; experimenting rapidly; unclear what customers want
2. Early PMF, scaling -- Found initial PMF; growing fast; adding features to retain/expand
3. Mature product, optimization -- Established market; incremental improvements; competing on quality
4. Multiple products/platform -- Portfolio of products; cross-product dependencies

Question 2: Team Context

"What's your team and stakeholder environment like?"

1. Small team, limited resources -- 3-5 engineers, 1 PM, need to focus ruthlessly
2. Cross-functional team, aligned -- Product, design, engineering aligned; clear goals
3. Multiple stakeholders, misaligned -- Execs, sales, customers all have opinions; need transparent process
4. Large org, complex dependencies -- Multiple teams, shared roadmap

Question 3: Decision-Making Needs

"What's the primary challenge you're trying to solve with prioritization?"

1. Too many ideas, unclear which to pursue -- Backlog is 100+ items; need to narrow to top 10
2. Stakeholders disagree on priorities -- Sales wants features, execs want strategic bets
3. Lack of data-driven decisions -- Prioritizing by gut feel; want metrics-based process
4. Hard tradeoffs between strategic bets vs. quick wins

Question 4: Data Availability

"How much data do you have to inform prioritization?"

1. Minimal data -- New product, no usage metrics, few customers to survey
2. Some data -- Basic analytics, customer feedback, but no rigorous data collection
3. Rich data -- Usage metrics, A/B tests, customer surveys, clear success metrics

Output: Framework Recommendation

After collecting responses, recommend a framework with:

• Rationale: Why this framework fits (linked to Q1-Q4 answers)
• Implementation steps: Concrete how-to (4 steps)
• Example scoring template: Filled-in example table
• Alternative framework: Second choice with tradeoffs
• Pitfalls: Common mistakes with this framework
• Reassess when: Triggers to reconsider the framework choice

Examples

Example 1: Good Match (Early PMF + RICE)

• Context: Early PMF, aligned cross-functional team, some data, wants metrics-based decisions
• Recommendation: RICE -- has data for Reach/Impact, team can agree on scoring, structured without being heavy
• Why NOT ICE: Too subjective for a team that wants data-driven process

Example 2: Bad Match (Pre-PMF + RICE = Wrong Fit)

• Context: Pre-PMF, small team, minimal data, too many ideas
• Recommendation: ICE or Value/Effort Matrix -- lightweight, fast, no data required
• Why NOT RICE: No usage data for Reach, overhead kills speed at pre-PMF stage

Common Pitfalls

Pitfall 1: Using the Wrong Framework for Your Stage

Symptom: Pre-PMF startup using weighted scoring with 10 criteria Fix: Match framework to stage. Pre-PMF = ICE. Scaling = RICE. Mature = Opportunity Scoring or Kano.

Pitfall 2: Framework Whiplash

Symptom: Switching frameworks every quarter Fix: Stick with one framework for 6-12 months. Reassess only when stage/context changes.

Pitfall 3: Treating Scores as Gospel

Symptom: "Feature A scored 8,000, Feature B scored 7,999, so A wins" Fix: Use frameworks as input, not automation. PM judgment overrides scores when needed.

Pitfall 4: Solo PM Scoring

Symptom: PM scores features alone, presents to team Fix: Collaborative scoring sessions. PM, design, engineering score together.

Pitfall 5: No Framework at All

Symptom: "We prioritize by who shouts loudest" Fix: Pick any framework. Even imperfect structure beats chaos.

References

External Frameworks

• Intercom, RICE Prioritization (2016)
• Sean McBride, ICE Scoring (2012)
• Luke Hohmann, Innovation Games (2006) -- Buy-a-Feature
• Noriaki Kano, Kano Model (1984)

Credit

• Adapted from Dean Peters, Product Manager Skills (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).