As a software development professional with over 15 years of experience, I know just how important agile prioritization is to the success of a project. Selecting the correct strategy can have a massive impact on your project. In this article, I’ll walk you through the different agile prioritization techniques so you can determine the best strategy for your team.
You’ll also discover actionable tips to optimize your workflow and increase productivity.
Agile Prioritization Techniques Overview
Agile prioritization techniques are how teams determine which tasks to tackle first in fast-paced projects. These methods ensure that we are working on the highest value items, which maximizes our productivity and the project’s success.
Effective prioritization in agile projects has several key advantages:
- Higher productivity
- Better resource use
- Happy stakeholders
- Faster time to market
- Better ability to adjust
However, agile prioritization isn’t without its challenges, as teams often encounter conflicting stakeholder priorities, unclear business value, and estimation challenges, all of which can result in suboptimal prioritization decisions.
Popular agile prioritization techniques include:
- MoSCoW Method
- Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF)
- Kano Model
- Value vs. Effort Matrix
- Story Mapping
- Opportunity Scoring
- Eisenhower Matrix
As each method has its own strengths and best use cases, you’ll need to select the method that best fits your project’s unique needs and constraints.
I’ve personally used many of these prioritization techniques during my 15+ years as a software developer. What I’ve learned is that there isn’t a single “best” way to prioritize tasks. Instead, the trick is understanding the principles behind each method and then tweaking it to fit your team’s specific context.
MoSCoW Method
The MoSCoW Method is a framework that classifies features into four categories: Must-have, Should-have, Could-have Won’t-have. It’s a simple and effective framework for prioritizing requirements based on how critical they are to the project’s success.
Here’s how to use the MoSCoW method in agile projects:
- Compile a list of requirements.
- Place each requirement into one of the four groups.
- Discuss and refine the categories with stakeholders.
- Only focus on Must-haves and Should-haves.
The MoSCoW method is easy to learn, easy to sell to stakeholders, and provides some flexibility when planning a project.
That said, the MoSCoW method also has drawbacks. It doesn’t take into account the effort of each item, and you might accidentally end up with too many Must-haves, resulting in scope creep.
To use the MoSCoW method effectively:
- Don’t allow more than 60% to be considered Must-haves.
- Regularly revisit and update the categories.
- Involve every stakeholder in the categorization process.
- Combine the MoSCoW method with other prioritization frameworks.
As a small project team leader, I found the MoSCoW method most helpful during the scoping phase of a project. It allowed us to quickly identify the core functionality and ensure we set proper expectations with stakeholders.
Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF)
Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) was created by Don Reinertsen. This framework calculates priority by dividing the Cost of Delay by the job’s size. WSJF is helpful because it enables you to identify valuable jobs that are small and can be completed quickly.
The WSJF formula is:
WSJF = Cost of Delay / job size
The Cost of Delay is a combination of User/Business Value and Time Criticality * Time/Value Decay.
Here’s how you calculate WSJF scores:
- Estimate the Cost of Delay for each job
- Estimate the job’s size (in story points)
- Divide Cost of Delay by job size
- Rank jobs by their WSJF scores
WSJF is valuable because it is a quantitative approach to prioritizing work. You can compare any two jobs and make an objective decision about which is more valuable and/or requires less effort.
I’ve used WSJF successfully on multiple projects. Here’s how to make it work:
- Use relative estimating for both Cost of Delay and size
Refine estimates as you learn more information - Involve the entire team in the estimation process
- Do not blindly trust WSJF scores. Use them to inform discussions.
WSJF is the right framework for teams that need a more data driven approach to prioritizing work. It’s particularly useful if you have a long list of jobs with different types of value.
Kano Model
The Kano Model was created by Professor Noriaki Kano in the 1980s. The Kano Model categorizes features into five buckets: Must-be, One-dimensional, Attractive, Indifferent Reverse. It helps teams understand how different features impact customer satisfaction.
Using the Kano Model for agile prioritization looks like:
- Select potential features.
- Create a Kano questionnaire.
- Survey customers or stakeholders.
- Analyze the results to group features.
- Prioritize features based on feature groups.
The Kano Model provides a different perspective on customer feature preferences. It helps you discover features that customers will love beyond just needing them. This approach can make your product more innovative and competitive.
However, the Kano Model is labor intensive. You have to collect the data and then categorize it. The output is also somewhat subjective and can change as customers expect more.
Real-world example: A software company I worked with used the Kano Model to prioritize features a new mobile app. After running the Kano Model, they discovered a feature they thought was “Attractive” was actually a “Must-be” for their specific customer. This insight dramatically changed the focus of their development roadmap.
The Kano Model is most helpful when you need to consider development resources alongside customer satisfaction. It also ensures you only focus on features that will have the biggest impact on user satisfaction.
Value vs. Effort Matrix
The Value vs Effort Matrix is a simple visual framework to help prioritize tasks based on the perceived value of the task and the effort to implement the task. This is a great framework for teams to quickly identify the highest value tasks with the lowest effort to implement.
To create and use a Value vs Effort Matrix:
- List all tasks/ features.
- Estimate the value and effort of each task/ feature.
- Plot the tasks on a 2×2 grid (Value on the Y-axis, Effort on the X-axis).
- Prioritize the tasks in the top right of the matrix.
This framework is simple to understand and apply, you can quickly visualize priorities, and it’s a great framework to use to have productive discussions about value vs effort trade-offs.
The key to making this framework work is accurately estimating value and effort. Here are a few tips:
- Use relative sizing (i.e., small, medium, large) rather than trying to estimate an absolute value.
- Involve both business stakeholders (for value) and technical stakeholders (for effort) in the estimation.
- Consider both short term and long term value.
- Review and update the matrix regularly.
I like the Value vs Effort Matrix specifically for quick prioritization. It’s great when you need to make decisions quickly with limited information.
Story Mapping
Jeff Patton introduced Story Mapping. It is a visual representation of a product backlog organized by user activities. Using the Story Mapping technique, teams can see the big picture and how various features fit together.
Steps to create a great Story Map:
- Identify user activities or goals.
- Arrange those activities in a logical order.
- Break activities down into user stories.
- Prioritize stories in each activity.
- Define release boundaries.
Story Mapping also helps teams prioritize as they can see how various user stories contribute to the overall user activity. You can then determine which user stories are critical to an MVP and which can wait until a future release.
Best practices of using Story Mapping within agile:
- Use physical cards for collaborative story mapping sessions.
- Involve the entire team.
Regularly revisit and update the story map. - Use the story map to inform sprint planning and backlog grooming.
In my Master’s in Software Engineering Management program, we studied several adaptive development frameworks. Story Mapping was the most powerful tool we learned to ensure that the team was building what the user needed.
It’s especially useful on larger, more complex projects with many different user activities. This ensures the team always prioritizes work that directly aligns with a user activity.
Opportunity Scoring
Opportunity Scoring is another concept developed by Anthony Ulwick in the Jobs-to-be-Done framework. It’s a technique to prioritize features based on the opportunity to satisfy important underserved customer needs.
To use Opportunity Scoring in agile projects:
- Identify customer jobs-to-be-done.
- Rate the importance and satisfaction of each job.
- Calculate opportunity scores (Importance + (Importance – Satisfaction)).
- Prioritize features that help customers get a high opportunity job done.
Opportunity Scoring has several advantages as a prioritization framework. It ensures you’re solving for customer needs rather than solution ideas. You can determine where customers are underserved in the market. It often leads to more innovative, valuable features.
How to collect and analyze customer data to score opportunity:
- Survey data or customer interviews.
- A representative sample of the market you’re targeting.
- A consistent scale (1-10) for rating importance and satisfaction.
- Validate scores with customers through a debriefing call.
I’ve seen Opportunity Scoring be most effective for teams with too many feature requests and no idea where to start. It provides a data-driven framework to understand what customers really want.
Eisenhower Matrix in Agile Context
The Eisenhower Matrix groups tasks into four quadrants based on their urgency and importance. We can borrow this timeless prioritization technique and apply it to agile teams to ensure they work on the tasks that truly move the needle.
Within an agile framework, you can bucket tasks as:
- Urgent and Important: Sprint backlog items
- Important but Not Urgent: Product backlog items
- Urgent but Not Important: Quick wins or technical debt
- Neither Urgent nor Important: Tasks to deprioritize
This is helpful for agile teams because it provides a simple framework they can use to make decisions. You can easily see which tasks qualify as urgent and important and which you could schedule for a future sprint.
I’ve used the Eisenhower Matrix in agile projects to ensure teams focused on the tasks that truly mattered. For example, we used this matrix to strike a balance between working on new features and resolving technical debt by identifying both urgent sprint tasks to build new features and important, long-term investments.
Comparative Analysis of Agile Prioritization Techniques
When selecting a prioritization framework, it’s important to understand each framework’s strengths and weaknesses. Here’s a quick framework comparison:
- MoSCoW: Simple, great for scoping projects. Doesn’t consider effort.
- WSJF: Data-driven, considers value and effort. Can be complex to use.
- Kano Model: Customer satisfaction-focused. Requires a lot of upfront research.
- Value vs. Effort Matrix: Visual and easy to understand. May oversimplify the decision.
- Story Mapping: Contextual, helps map back to the user’s job. It can be time-consuming for larger projects.
- Opportunity Scoring: Reveals unmet needs in the market. Requires in-depth customer data.
- Eisenhower Matrix: Basic, balances urgency and importance of tasks. Can miss higher-level priorities.
Each strategy is ideal in different use cases. Use MoSCoW to scope a project. Use WSJF to prioritize your backlog. Use the Kano Model when you need to gather in-depth customer insights.
To select the right framework, think about your project’s size, available data, and complexity. Also, consider the skill level of your team and how much time you can realistically spend on prioritization.
In my experience, the best results often come from using multiple frameworks together. For example, you could use MoSCoW to prioritize at a high level and WSJF within each item to make granular decisions.
Implementing Agile Prioritization in Your Team
Implementing a new prioritization method with your team will require some careful planning and execution. Here’s how you can ensure a smooth transition:
- Train your team on the selected prioritization method.
- Run a pilot project or sprint.
- Collect feedback and iterate.
- Scale the prioritization method with your team.
There will likely be some pushback when introducing a new process. Your team might question the value of the prioritization method, struggle to make a change, or feel like they don’t have time to implement the new technique.
To overcome these challenges:
- Clearly explain the benefits of the prioritization method.
- Offer training and resources.
- Be patient and give your team time to learn.
- Set an example by consistently using the prioritization method.
Team buy-in and collaboration are also essential. Engage the entire team in the prioritization method selection process. Create an open environment where the team can discuss priorities. Celebrate wins and learn from failures as a team.
To determine whether the prioritization method is working, track metrics such as:
- Percentage of sprint goals achieved.
- Stakeholder satisfaction.
- Time to market for key features.
- Team velocity and predictability.
Remember, the goal is to increase your team’s ability to deliver value not to force a prioritization method that doesn’t fit. Be flexible and adjust your strategy based on your team’s unique needs and feedback.
Case Studies: Successful Agile Prioritization in Action
Here are a few examples of successful agile prioritization I’ve seen work in my own career:
Example 1: Ecommerce Platform Redesign
A mid-sized ecommerce company applied the Kano Model to prioritize features for its platform redesign. Through customer feedback, they discovered that a one-click checkout process was actually a “Must-be” for their customers (even though it initially ranked as “Attractive” in the Kano Model). This insight allowed the company to prioritize development of the feature, yielding a 15% increase in conversion rate.
Key takeaway: Customers often perceive value differently than the internal team. Therefore, ongoing customer feedback is critical to effective prioritization.
Example 2: Mobile Banking App
A bank chose the WSJF method to prioritize its backlog for a new mobile banking app. By focusing on high value, low effort items, the bank was able to launch an MVP of the mobile banking app two months early. This early MVP allowed the bank to ship something quickly, gather user feedback, and out-execute its competition.
Lesson learned: Leveraging quantitative prioritization can dramatically accelerate time to market when consistently applied.
Example 3: Healthcare Software Company
A healthcare software company used the Eisenhower Matrix to prioritize its agile process. It tallied the number of urgent bug fixes against number of important long-term feature improvements. As a result, the company reduced technical debt by 30% over a six-month period without sacrificing immediate customer needs.
Key takeaway: Balancing immediate customer needs against addressing longer-term technical debt is key to successful software companies.
These examples highlight the variety of ways companies apply prioritization frameworks. The consistent theme, however, is each company’s commitment to making prioritization decisions based on data and then refining its approach based on results.
Tools and Software for Agile Prioritization
Many agile tools have functionality to support different prioritization techniques. Here are some of the most common options:
- Jira: Beloved by many teams and supports custom fields for prioritization scores. Excellent integration with other Atlassian products.
- Trello: Visual boards are helpful for techniques like the Value vs. Effort Matrix.
- VersionOne: Built-in support for various prioritization techniques, including WSJF.
- Productboard: Designed specifically for customer-centric prioritization, such as Opportunity Scoring.
- Azure DevOps: Customizable work item fields and boards for various prioritization techniques.
Key features to look for in a tool:
- Customizable fields for prioritization scores
- Visual representations (e.g., matrices, maps)
- Reporting and analytical capabilities
- Integration with other development tools
- Collaboration features for team-based prioritization
When choosing a tool with your team, consider:
- Ease of use and learning curve
- Compatibility with your existing tech stack
Scalability as you grow - Cost and licensing model
- Available support and community of users
The key with any of these tools is integration with your existing agile workflows. Avoid any tool that feels like it will require you to change your entire agile workflow. There’s enough customization in all of these tools to make them fit your specific workflow as an agile team.
Ultimately, the best tool is the one your team will actually use consistently, so ensure they’re aligned on trying it out during the selection process. Most of these tools offer a free trial, so use it to test the tool with your team prior to making a final selection.
Remember, the key with any of these tools is that it’s just a process your team has already agreed upon to make prioritization decisions. Don’t let the tool become the process. The process is more important than the tool.
Agile estimation techniques can also be integrated into these tools to enhance your prioritization process. By combining estimation with prioritization, you can make more informed decisions about which tasks to tackle first.
When implementing these tools, it’s crucial to consider agile stakeholder management. Ensure that all relevant stakeholders are involved in the prioritization process and have access to the chosen tool for transparency and collaboration.
In Closing
Agile prioritization strategies are key to a project’s success. I’ve witnessed teams excel by using these strategies. MoSCoW, WSJF, Kano Model, Value vs. Effort Matrix, Story Mapping, Opportunity Scoring, and the Eisenhower Matrix are all excellent prioritization techniques. Select the one that is the best fit for your team. After all, effective prioritization results in better results and more satisfied stakeholders. You’re now ready to select the right strategy and move your projects forward.
