One of the most challenging, but crucial, aspects of product management is determining how to make decisions in the face of so many competing objectives. Product Prioritization needs determining which products or features to develop first, based on factors such as business goals, market opportunity, and technical feasibility. Prioritization has always been one of the most difficult stages of product management. Product managers (PMs) are constantly confronted with divergent requirements from customers, sales teams, development teams, and customer success teams. Everybody has wants, and they often go to the product team for answers. Despite the proliferation of priority frameworks over the last decade, such as RICE, MoSCoW, Kano Model, Opportunity Scoring, etc, product prioritization continues to be a common concern across enterprises.
So, why is product prioritizing so difficult? Let’s break it down into a few typical errors made by product teams and discuss the ways we can fix them.
Pitfall – 1
Miscommunicated scoring guide –
What is the significance of a “2” impact score? A 1% increase or a 10% increase in terms of Monthly Recurring Revenue or conversion rate? Is this the opinion of other teammates? No side-by-side comparison can be made across efforts without agreed-upon grading criteria. As a result, setting priorities is a waste of time. Because you’re effectively masking your beliefs as objective conclusions, you’re increasing the chances of a conflict amongst your team members, which might be problematic.
Fix – Develop a grading guide for your prioritizing criteria that you can all use. Explain in detail and with specific examples what each level comprises. You may design a scoring guide for any prioritizing approach, provided that it is:
As an example, you may utilize RICE Prioritization’s Impact Scoring approach to provide you with an estimate of how much a new feature will affect a particular segment of the customer base. The scoring system looks like this –
Despite the existence of a standard, there will still be differences — and that’s OK. Everyone in the team should feel comfortable sharing their thoughts and opinions with the rest of the group. Your team members will learn about each other’s strengths and weaknesses via these dialogues.
Pitfall -2
Not reaching out to the public as a part of the prioritization process
For PMs, there is only an internal, one-dimensional view of the desirability of a feature. PMs need to be able to constantly question their own biases to succeed. No matter how certain the PM is about a feature proposal, he or she can’t be sure whether it’s a wise investment of time and money if he or she doesn’t hear from consumers first.
Fix – 3 words “Product Feature Validation”. The most crucial thing is to do some type of validation before gathering insights on high-priority issues for the next sprint. Whether you want to do user interviews, beta testing, A/B testing, or surveys, it’s vital to the prioritizing process to verify ideas at some level once they’ve been put through a prioritization framework or a value vs. cost quadrant.
The following are some of the questions that a good customer validation process should assist you in answering:
Pitfall 3 –
Not considering the constraints
Product development is an inherently chaotic process. Aside from the fundamental value-versus-cost assessment, dependencies, timelines, talent fit, and strategy fit, other restrictions also impact prioritized choices. PMs cannot simply reject these constraints, no matter how urgent the prioritizing is. Teams that do not have a robust framework in place to cope with these external issues sometimes lose faith in their prioritizing methods.
Fix – Create a set of rules for dealing with these limiting factors and include them in your priority system.
Example –
When you have a consistent set of guidelines, people will develop faith in the system because they will know that all decisions are made objectively.
Pitfall 4 –
Prioritization based on Personal Bias
Product managers must prioritize based on their understanding of the industry, the target audience, and the product. However, if you detect a correlation between lukewarm client responses to a product and biased prioritizing, you should reconsider many factors.
Fix – In an ideal world, PMs should have a framework that guides them through the process of prioritizing backlog items and user stories based on their desirability, practicality, and viability:
Pitfall 5 –
Irrelevant features in Backlog
The backlog should not be used as a notepad for everyone to scribble down odd product ideas. It is intended to serve as an intuitive and well-organized resource for pertinent efforts. To do this, it is critical to have a clear product vision—and to ensure that everyone adheres to it. You may be wondering what a clear product vision has to do with a clogged product backlog. When everyone understands and adheres to the product vision, PMs can be certain that proper ideas are being generated and added to the backlog.
Fix – Here is a breakdown of the ideal product vision
A strong product vision articulates the PM’s long-term expectations for the product’s influence on customers and the industry. Additionally, product vision is meaningless if no one on the team is continuously considering it while screening for feature requests to be added to the backlog.
The most effective approach to achieve this is to discuss with your team what they believe the vision implies. When conducting these discussions, the objective should be to get everyone on the same page. This may be accomplished via prioritizing activities, such as the one we had in our previous blog using the MoSCoW prioritization exercise with Spotify features. This will motivate everyone to quantify what is important to the business.
Conclusion –
Teams should collaborate to ensure that features are prioritized and organized according to the factors that matter most to the business. Maintaining ongoing cooperation and a conducive atmosphere for thoughts and opinions will also help everyone feel heard. Additionally, by defining those principles, the team might feel as if their contributions are based on qualitative and quantitative criteria. When PMs take the time to define these priority guidelines, they can be certain that their time and effort will be spent on the projects that are most important to the product, the organization, and the consumers.
Finally, PMs can always depend on Freshflows Prioritization templates to keep them on track, including RICE, Value vs. Effort, MoSCoW, and Weighted Scoring. They just need to input data and, if required, tweak it.
ContentIn which Do i need to Find A totally free Online game?Using Achievements Within the…
AiséHabile Avec Secret De Salle de jeu ThunderstruckCasino Gratification Conserve trois$Quel Nouveaux Possibilités Vivent Réalisez…
ContentBesten Google Pay CasinosHaupttreffer Spiele Inoffizieller mitarbeiter Casino Irgendwo Man 1 Ecu Einzahlen DarfZuverlässigkeit As…
ArticlesReal cash Cellular Gambling gamesSecurity List Of Wonderful Riviera Gambling establishment SaidEverygame Gambling establishment Added…
ContentCasino Quelque peu Gratis À l’exclusion de DepotBonnes Conditions En compagnie de Annihiler Les ComptabilitésSituation…
ContentLive Kasino Über Mobilfunktelefon EinzahlenErreichbar Casino Via Mobilem Saldieren: Unser Besten Ernährer Ein Schweizerische eidgenossenschaft…