# Prioritization Walkthrough — Learn by Doing ## Before We Begin **Diagnostic:** Why prioritize at all? If you could only ship *one* initiative this quarter, how would you choose which one? What would "the right choice" mean in your context? **Checkpoint:** You can name at least one trade-off you'd face (e.g., revenue vs. retention, quick win vs. strategic bet) and why a gut feel isn't enough. --- ## Step 1: Compute RICE Scores **Task:** Three initiatives: (A) Reach 5,000, Impact 2, Confidence 80%, Effort 2 person-months. (B) Reach 3,000, Impact 1, Confidence 100%, Effort 0.5. (C) Reach 8,000, Impact 0.5, Confidence 50%, Effort 4. Compute RICE for each. Rank them. **Question:** Why does (B) rank highest despite lower Reach? What would change if you doubled (C)'s Confidence? **Checkpoint:** The user computes: A ≈ 4,000, B ≈ 6,000, C ≈ 500. Rank: B, A, C. They understand Effort and Confidence strongly affect the score. --- ## Step 2: Apply MoSCoW to a Release **Task:** You're planning a "v2 search" release. Assign these to M/S/C/W (max 3 Must, max 3 Should): basic keyword search, filters, search suggestions, export results, save searches, analytics dashboard, API for search, keyboard shortcuts. **Question:** What's the risk of making "export results" a Must? How would you negotiate if stakeholders want 5 Musts? **Checkpoint:** The user assigns items with justification. They recognize basic search is Must; export might be Should or Could. They can explain why capping Must forces tradeoffs. --- ## Step 3: Build an Impact Map **Task:** Goal: "Reduce support tickets about 'how do I reset my password' by 30% in Q3." Build an impact map: 2 actors, 2 impacts per actor, 2 deliverables per impact. **Question:** Why does Impact describe *behavior change* rather than *features*? What assumption are you making? **Checkpoint:** The user produces: actors (e.g., users, support agents), impacts (e.g., "users self-serve reset"), deliverables (e.g., clearer UX, reset email). They state at least one assumption (e.g., "users will use the new flow"). --- ## Step 4: Plot Value vs Effort **Task:** Take 6 real or hypothetical initiatives from your work. Define "value" and "effort" for your context. Plot each on a 2×2. Label: 1 quick win, 1 big bet, 1 avoid. **Question:** Who might disagree with your "avoid" placement? How would you defend it? **Checkpoint:** The user has a matrix with 6 items. Quick win = high value, low effort. Avoid = low value, high effort. They can justify the avoid and anticipate stakeholder pushback. --- ## Step 5: Defend a Priority **Task:** You prioritized "Dark mode" over "Export to PDF" using RICE. A stakeholder says: "Export is critical for enterprise users." Write your response in 4–6 sentences. Reference the model; acknowledge their concern; offer a path forward. **Question:** What would you do if they provide new data (e.g., enterprise is 40% of revenue) that changes Reach or Impact? **Checkpoint:** The user's response shows the numbers, explains why Dark mode scored higher, acknowledges the concern, and offers to re-score with updated inputs or add Export to next quarter. --- ## Step 6: Combine Frameworks **Task:** For a single product initiative, use both RICE and Impact Mapping. First: write the goal and build a 2-layer impact map. Then: pick 3 deliverables from the map and score them with RICE. What does each framework reveal that the other doesn't? **Question:** When would you lead with Impact Mapping vs RICE in a stakeholder meeting? Why? **Checkpoint:** The user produces an impact map and RICE scores for 3 deliverables. They articulate: Impact Mapping shows *why* and *who*; RICE provides *rank order*. They can choose the right lead depending on audience (strategic vs tactical).