prioritizing-with-evidencelisted

# Prioritizing with Evidence ## Overview Prioritization replaces the HiPPO (the loudest opinion) with a method grounded in real data, and ranks by **outcome and value**, not by who asked. Pick the method that fits the decision — don't force one. ## Choose the method | Method | Best for | Formula / mechanism | |--------|----------|---------------------| | **MoSCoW** (DSDM) | Scope negotiation under fixed time/cost | Must / Should / Could / Won't. Keep Must ≤ ~60% effort; keep a ~20% Could contingency pool | | **RICE** (Intercom) | Comparing roadmap ideas consistently | (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort = impact per time worked | | **Kano** | Classifying features by satisfaction effect | Pair a *functional* + *dysfunctional* survey question → basic / performance / delighter / indifferent / reverse | | **WSJF** (SAFe) | Sequencing for economic value | Cost of Delay ÷ Job Size — "if you quantify one thing, quantify cost of delay" | | **Opportunity scoring** (Ulwick/Olsen) | Finding underserved needs | Importance + max(Importance − Satisfaction, 0) → important-but-unsatisfied wins | ## Workflow 1. Pick the method matching the decision (negotiating scope → MoSCoW; ranking ideas → RICE; understanding feature *type* → Kano; economic sequencing → WSJF; sizing unmet needs → opportunity scoring). 2. Ground inputs in real data — Reach and Effort from metrics, Importance/Satisfaction from a representative survey, Kano from customer responses (not internal opinion). 3. Prioritiz