CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

prioritization-frameworks

Reference guide to 9 prioritization frameworks with formulas, when-to-use guidance, and templates — RICE, ICE, Kano, MoSCoW, Opportunity Score, and more. Use when selecting a prioritization method, comparing frameworks like RICE vs ICE, or learning how different prioritization approaches work.

89

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Prioritization Frameworks Reference

A reference guide to help you select and apply the right prioritization framework for your context.

Core Principle

Never allow customers to design solutions. Prioritize problems (opportunities), not features.

Opportunity Score (Dan Olsen, The Lean Product Playbook)

The recommended framework for prioritizing customer problems.

Survey customers on Importance and Satisfaction for each need (normalize to 0–1 scale).

Three related formulas:

  • Current value = Importance × Satisfaction
  • Opportunity Score = Importance × (1 − Satisfaction)
  • Customer value created = Importance × (S2 − S1), where S1 = satisfaction before, S2 = satisfaction after

High Importance + low Satisfaction = highest Opportunity Score = best opportunities. Plot on an Importance vs Satisfaction chart — upper-left quadrant is the sweet spot. Prioritizes customer problems, not solutions.

ICE Framework

Useful for prioritizing initiatives and ideas. Considers not only value but also risk and economic factors.

  • I (Impact) = Opportunity Score × Number of Customers affected
  • C (Confidence) = How confident are we? (1-10). Accounts for risk.
  • E (Ease) = How easy is it to implement? (1-10). Accounts for economic factors.

Score = I × C × E. Higher = prioritize first.

RICE Framework

Splits ICE's Impact into two separate factors. Useful for larger teams that need more granularity.

  • R (Reach) = Number of customers affected
  • I (Impact) = Opportunity Score (value per customer)
  • C (Confidence) = How confident are we? (0-100%)
  • E (Effort) = How much effort to implement? (person-months)

Score = (R × I × C) / E

9 Frameworks Overview

FrameworkBest ForKey Insight
Eisenhower MatrixPersonal tasksUrgent vs Important — for individual PM task management
Impact vs EffortTasks/initiativesSimple 2×2 — quick triage, not rigorous for strategic decisions
Risk vs RewardInitiativesLike Impact vs Effort but accounts for uncertainty
Opportunity ScoreCustomer problemsRecommended. Importance × (1 − Satisfaction). Normalize to 0–1.
Kano ModelUnderstanding expectationsMust-be, Performance, Attractive, Indifferent, Reverse. For understanding, not prioritizing.
Weighted Decision MatrixMulti-factor decisionsAssign weights to criteria, score each option. Useful for stakeholder buy-in.
ICEIdeas/initiativesImpact × Confidence × Ease. Recommended for quick prioritization.
RICEIdeas at scale(Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort. Adds Reach to ICE.
MoSCoWRequirementsMust/Should/Could/Won't. Caution: project management origin.

Templates

  • Opportunity Score intro (PDF)
  • Importance vs Satisfaction Template — Dan Olsen (Google Slides)
  • ICE Template (Google Sheets)
  • RICE Template (Google Sheets)

Further Reading

Repository
phuryn/pm-skills
Last updated
Created

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.