Unlocking Success Beyond Traditional Product Roadmap Prioritization Frameworks
Don't focus on single metrics and numbers
Product management practices can differ significantly across companies, but one common aspect is the need to prioritize a roadmap. My high level strategy is setting objectives and aligning features under those objectives (more here on that). After that, to prioritize features, several frameworks can be employed, such as RICE, Kano Model, Weighted Scoring, and MoSCoW.
I’ve found applying these frameworks to a roadmap can be challenging at startups when there isn’t a lot of time and perfect information is never available. Given that reality, here are some tactics to consider that I use when applying those frameworks.
Don't Overemphasize Specific Metrics
In smaller B2B companies, it's essential not to focus too much on specific user metrics. Instead, concentrate on what customers are saying, as quantitative metrics alone may not capture the full context of user needs. For example, I have relied on click-through rates for any link on the page as a proxy for user interest, only to realize through conversations with users that they were clicking around on the links since they were confused by the initial language.
Additionally, sometimes a small percentage of the customers contribute almost all of the revenue (I’ve seen 20/80 splits), and it is crucial to keep these customers satisfied with the product. It's important not to tailor features solely for individual clients because that may not be sustainable. But, if a customer expresses interest in a feature planned for a later release, I adjust the roadmap and prioritize that feature sooner. I strive to maintain the mindset that current customers don't define what you build, but rather, the prioritization of what you build.
Align Roadmap with a Larger Vision
I won't dwell on this point, as I've dedicated an entire blogpost to the subject. However, after each significant iteration of the roadmap, I step back and ensure it conveys a broader narrative. For instance, I've encountered roadmaps centered solely on minor fixes or adding features to reach parity with competitors. Such roadmaps ultimately proved uninspiring for the team and often lacked long-term benefits for the company.
Collaborate with Stakeholders early
Work early on with stakeholders to get their feedback and buy-in. For example, I'll brainstorm with my go-to-market counterparts to determine which customer types would benefit from specific features and estimate how many customers might use a feature. I'll also partner with engineering to understand the effort required to build a feature.
All PMs collaborate with internal stakeholders on roadmaps, and I find the challenging part is knowing when to loop folks in. When I'm new, I tend to inform others earlier on and more frequently. Over time, I'll adjust the communication based on the person or group. Generally, I find it's much easier to give people something to react to rather than having them provide their categorization from scratch. For instance, inviting a designer to review a prioritization attempt and provide feedback can be more efficient than having them go through the entire process alone or even with me.
Use T-shirt Sizes for Estimates
Obtaining precise numbers can be challenging in many frameworks. Instead, I utilize T-shirt sizes (XS, S, M, L, XL) for categorizing estimates. This approach simplifies the prioritization process and can be more accurate in the long run.
It's certainly helpful to identify which existing customers could use a feature. However, by representing the final customer count in T-shirt sizes, we acknowledge that we might not have been able to conduct a comprehensive review of every customer.
Footnote on Frameworks
RICE
The RICE framework (Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort) helps product teams prioritize their work based on the expected impact of each project. Reach considers how many customers will be affected by a project, Impact assesses the impact on each customer, Confidence gauges the team's confidence in the estimates, and Effort estimates how much work the project will require. The RICE score formula allows teams to compare projects at a glance and make better-informed decisions.
Kano Model
The Kano Model is a customer-centric prioritization framework that helps identify which product features will delight customers the most. It categorizes features into three categories: Basic, Performance, and Delighters. Basic features are considered essential to customers, and their absence causes dissatisfaction. Performance features increase satisfaction as they improve, and Delighters are unexpected features that generate delight. This model enables product teams to prioritize features that meet customer needs and differentiate the product.
Weighted Scoring
Weighted Scoring is a flexible prioritization framework that allows teams to assign values to different factors important to their business, such as revenue potential, market opportunity, customer need, or strategic alignment. Each project is then scored according to these factors, and the scores are totaled, allowing teams to rank projects based on their total score. Weighted Scoring is customizable and can adapt to changing priorities.
MoSCoW Framework
The MoSCoW framework (Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won't have) categorizes features based on their importance, urgency, and feasibility. “Must have” features are essential to the product and must be delivered. “Should have” features that are important but not essential and should be delivered if possible. “Could have” features are nice to have, but they can be postponed if necessary. “Won't have” features are low priority or out of scope for the current roadmap. This framework helps product teams focus on essential features and negotiate scope with stakeholders.