/prioritization

name: prioritization
compatibility: "Claude Code 2.1.220+"
description: "Prioritization frameworks — RICE, WSJF, ICE, MoSCoW, and opportunity cost scoring for backlog ranking. Use when prioritizing features, comparing initiatives, justifying roadmap decisions, or evaluating trade-offs between competing work items."
tags: [rice, wsjf, ice, moscow, prioritization, backlog, scoring, ranking]
context: fork
agent: product-strategist
version: 1.0.0
author: OrchestKit
user-invocable: false
disable-model-invocation: false
complexity: medium
persuasion-type: guidance
metadata:
  category: document-asset-creation
allowed-tools: [Read, Glob, Grep, WebFetch, WebSearch]

Prioritization Frameworks

Score, rank, and justify backlog decisions using the right framework for the situation.

Decision Tree: Which Framework to Use

Do you have a hard deadline or regulatory pressure?
  YES → WSJF (Cost of Delay drives sequencing)
  NO  → Do you have reach/usage data?
          YES → RICE (data-driven, accounts for user reach)
          NO  → Are you in a time-boxed planning session?
                  YES → ICE (fast, 1-10 scales, no data required)
                  NO  → Is this a scope negotiation with stakeholders?
                          YES → MoSCoW (bucket features, control scope creep)
                          NO  → Value-Effort Matrix (quick 2x2 triage)

| Framework | Best For | Data Required | Time to Score | |-----------|----------|---------------|---------------| | RICE | Data-rich teams, steady-state prioritization | Analytics, user counts | 30-60 min | | WSJF | SAFe orgs, time-sensitive or regulated work | Relative estimates only | 15-30 min | | ICE | Startup speed, early validation, quick triage | None | 5-10 min | | MoSCoW | Scope negotiation, release planning | Stakeholder input | 1-2 hours | | Value-Effort | 2x2 visual, quick team alignment | None | 10-15 min |

---

RICE

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

| Factor | Scale | Notes | |--------|-------|-------| | Reach | Actual users/quarter | Use analytics; do not estimate | | Impact | 0.25 / 0.5 / 1 / 2 / 3 | Minimal → Massive per user | | Confidence | 0.3 / 0.5 / 0.8 / 1.0 | Moonshot → Strong data | | Effort | Person-months | Include design, eng, QA |

## RICE Scoring: [Feature Name]

| Feature     | Reach  | Impact | Confidence | Effort | Score  |
|-------------|--------|--------|------------|--------|--------|
| Smart search| 50,000 | 2      | 0.8        | 3      | 26,667 |
| CSV export  | 10,000 | 0.5    | 1.0        | 0.5    | 10,000 |
| Dark mode   | 30,000 | 0.25   | 1.0        | 1      |  7,500 |

See [rules/prioritize-rice.md](rules/prioritize-rice.md) for ICE, Kano, and full scale tables.

---

WSJF

WSJF = Cost of Delay / Job Size
Cost of Delay = User Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction  (1-21 Fibonacci each)

Higher WSJF = do first. Fibonacci scale (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21) forces relative sizing.

## WSJF: GDPR Compliance Update

User Value:       8   (required for EU customers)
Time Criticality: 21  (regulatory deadline this quarter)
Risk Reduction:   13  (avoids significant fines)
Job Size:          8  (medium complexity)

Cost of Delay = 8 + 21 + 13 = 42
WSJF = 42 / 8 = 5.25

See [rules/prioritize-wsjf.md](rules/prioritize-wsjf.md) for MoSCoW buckets and practical tips. See [references/wsjf-guide.md](references/wsjf-guide.md) for the full scoring guide.

---

ICE

ICE Score = Impact × Confidence × Ease    (all factors 1-10)

No user data required. Score relative to other backlog items. Useful for early-stage products and rapid triage sessions.

---

MoSCoW

Bucket features before estimation. Must-Haves alone should ship a viable product.

## Release 1.0 MoSCoW

### Must Have (~60% of effort)
- [ ] User authentication
- [ ] Core CRUD operations

### Should Have (~20%)
- [ ] Search, export, notifications

### Could Have (~20%)
- [ ] Dark mode, keyboard shortcuts

### Won't Have (documented out-of-scope)
- Mobile app (Release 2.0)
- AI features (Release 2.0)

---

Opportunity Cost & Trade-Off Analysis

When two items compete for the same team capacity, quantify what delaying each item costs per month.

## Trade-Off: AI Search vs Platform Migration (Q2 eng team)

### Option A: AI Search
- Cost of Delay: $25K/month (competitive risk)
- RICE Score: 18,000
- Effort: 6 weeks

### Option B: Platform Migration
- Cost of Delay: $5K/month (tech debt interest)
- RICE Score: 4,000
- Effort: 8 weeks

### Recommendation
Human decides. Key factors:
1. Q2 OKR: Increase trial-to-paid conversion (favors AI Search)
2. Engineering capacity: Only one team, sequential not parallel
3. Customer commitment: No contractual deadline for either

See [rules/prioritize-opportunity-cost.md](rules/prioritize-opportunity-cost.md) for the Value-Effort Matrix and full trade-off template. See [references/rice-scoring-guide.md](references/rice-scoring-guide.md) for detailed RICE calibration.

---

Common Pitfalls

| Pitfall | Mitigation | |---------|------------| | Gaming scores to justify pre-decided work | Calibrate as a team; document assumptions | | Mixing frameworks in one table | Pick one framework per planning session | | Only tracking high-RICE items; ignoring cost of delay | Combine RICE with explicit delay cost analysis | | MoSCoW Must-Have bloat (>70% of scope) | Must-Haves alone must ship a viable product | | Comparing RICE scores across different goals | Only compare within the same objective |

---

Related Skills

• `product-frameworks` — Full PM toolkit (value prop, market sizing, competitive analysis, user research, business case)
• `write-prd` — Convert prioritized features into product requirements documents
• `product-analytics` — Define and instrument the metrics that feed RICE reach/impact scores
• `okr-design` — Set the objectives that determine which KPIs drive RICE impact scoring
• `market