Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Prioritization techniques including MoSCoW, Kano model, weighted scoring, and value-effort matrices. Ranks requirements, features, backlog items, and investment decisions.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name prioritization
description Prioritization techniques including MoSCoW, Kano model, weighted scoring, and value-effort matrices. Ranks requirements, features, backlog items, and investment decisions.
allowed-tools Read, Glob, Grep, Task, Skill

Prioritization

Systematically rank and prioritize requirements, features, backlog items, and initiatives using proven prioritization frameworks. Supports MoSCoW, Kano model, weighted scoring, and value-effort analysis.

What is Prioritization?

Prioritization is the process of determining relative importance and ordering of items to focus resources on what matters most. Effective prioritization balances:

  • Value: Benefit to customers or business
  • Effort: Cost, time, and resources required
  • Risk: Uncertainty and potential downsides
  • Dependencies: Constraints and sequencing

Prioritization Techniques

MoSCoW Method

Categorical prioritization for timeboxed delivery:

Category Definition Guidance
Must Non-negotiable, required for success Without these, delivery is a failure
Should Important but not critical Significant value, workarounds exist
Could Desirable if resources permit Nice to have, enhances experience
Won't Explicitly excluded this time Not now, maybe later

When to Use: Sprint planning, release scoping, MVP definition, timeboxed projects

Rules:

  • Musts should be ~60% of capacity (leave room for unknowns)
  • Won'ts are explicitly stated (not silently dropped)
  • Categories are relative to the timebox, not absolute

Kano Model

Customer satisfaction-based classification:

Category If Present If Absent Detection
Basic (Must-Be) No increase in satisfaction Major dissatisfaction Customers assume these exist
Performance (Linear) Proportional satisfaction Proportional dissatisfaction Customers explicitly request
Delighter (Excitement) High satisfaction No dissatisfaction Customers don't expect
Indifferent No impact No impact No reaction either way
Reverse Dissatisfaction Satisfaction Segment prefers absence

When to Use: Product feature prioritization, understanding customer needs, differentiating from competitors

Kano Questionnaire:

  • Functional: "How would you feel if this feature was present?"
  • Dysfunctional: "How would you feel if this feature was absent?"

Responses: Like it, Expect it, Neutral, Can tolerate, Dislike it

Weighted Scoring Matrix

Multi-criteria quantitative comparison:

Step 1: Define Criteria

Criterion Weight Description
Customer Value 40% Impact on customer satisfaction
Strategic Fit 25% Alignment with goals
Effort 20% Development cost (inverse)
Risk 15% Uncertainty/failure potential (inverse)

Step 2: Score Items

Item Customer Value (1-5) Strategic Fit (1-5) Effort (1-5) Risk (1-5) Weighted Score
A 5 4 3 4 4.15
B 3 5 4 3 3.75

Step 3: Calculate Weighted Score

Score = Σ (Weight × Score)
Item A = (0.40×5) + (0.25×4) + (0.20×3) + (0.15×4) = 4.20

When to Use: Complex trade-offs, multiple stakeholders, defensible decisions

Value vs Effort Matrix

2×2 prioritization for quick decisions:

quadrantChart
    title Value vs Effort
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets (Plan carefully)
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins (Do first)
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins (Do if time permits)
    quadrant-4 Money Pits (Avoid)
Quadrant Value Effort Action
Quick Wins High Low Do first
Big Bets High High Plan carefully
Fill-ins Low Low Do if time permits
Money Pits Low High Avoid or deprioritize

When to Use: Fast initial triage, backlog grooming, stakeholder alignment

RICE Scoring

Product management prioritization:

Factor Definition Calculation
Reach Users/customers affected Number per time period
Impact Effect on each user 0.25 (minimal) to 3 (massive)
Confidence Certainty of estimates 0.5 (low) to 1 (high)
Effort Person-months required Number
RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

When to Use: Product roadmap prioritization, feature comparison

WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First)

SAFe/Lean prioritization for flow:

WSJF = Cost of Delay / Job Duration

Cost of Delay = User/Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction
Factor Score (1-20) Description
User/Business Value 1-20 Benefit to users or business
Time Criticality 1-20 Urgency, deadlines, decay
Risk Reduction 1-20 Risk/opportunity addressed
Job Duration 1-20 Relative size (inverted)

When to Use: Continuous flow environments, maximizing value delivery

Workflow

Phase 1: Prepare

Step 1: Gather Items to Prioritize

## Prioritization Session

**Date:** [ISO date]
**Scope:** [What's being prioritized]
**Stakeholders:** [Who's involved]
**Constraint:** [Timebox, budget, capacity]

### Items

| ID | Description | Owner |
|----|-------------|-------|
| 1 | [Item 1] | [Name] |
| 2 | [Item 2] | [Name] |

Step 2: Select Prioritization Technique

Situation Recommended Technique
Sprint/release planning MoSCoW
Product feature decisions Kano + RICE
Trade-off decisions Weighted Scoring
Quick triage Value vs Effort
Continuous flow WSJF
Multiple criteria Weighted Scoring

Phase 2: Execute

Step 1: Apply Selected Technique

Follow the specific technique workflow (see above).

Step 2: Validate Results

  • Do top priorities align with strategy?
  • Are dependencies respected?
  • Does the team have capacity?
  • Are stakeholders aligned?

Step 3: Document Rationale

## Prioritization Rationale

### Top Priorities

1. **[Item A]** - Score: X
   - Rationale: [Why this is top priority]
   - Dependencies: [What it depends on]

2. **[Item B]** - Score: Y
   - Rationale: [Why this is second]
   - Dependencies: [What it depends on]

### Deferred Items

- **[Item C]** - Reason: [Why deferred]

Phase 3: Communicate

Step 1: Create Prioritized Backlog

## Prioritized Backlog

| Rank | Item | Priority/Score | Owner | Target |
|------|------|----------------|-------|--------|
| 1 | [Item A] | Must / 4.5 | [Name] | Sprint 1 |
| 2 | [Item B] | Must / 4.2 | [Name] | Sprint 1 |
| 3 | [Item C] | Should / 3.8 | [Name] | Sprint 2 |

Step 2: Communicate Decisions

  • Share prioritization results with stakeholders
  • Explain rationale for key decisions
  • Address concerns about deprioritized items
  • Set expectations for what's not included

Output Formats

Narrative Summary

## Prioritization Summary

**Session:** [Scope/context]
**Date:** [ISO date]
**Technique:** [MoSCoW/Kano/Weighted Scoring/etc.]
**Facilitator:** prioritization-analyst

### Results Overview

- **Total Items:** N
- **Top Priority:** [Count]
- **Deferred:** [Count]

### Priority Distribution

| Category | Count | % |
|----------|-------|---|
| Must/Quick Wins | X | Y% |
| Should/Big Bets | X | Y% |
| Could/Fill-ins | X | Y% |
| Won't/Money Pits | X | Y% |

### Key Decisions

1. **[Top Item]**: Prioritized because [reason]
2. **[Deferred Item]**: Deferred because [reason]

### Next Steps

1. Begin work on top priority items
2. Re-prioritize at [next review point]

Structured Data (YAML)

prioritization:
  version: "1.0"
  date: "2025-01-15"
  scope: "Q1 Feature Backlog"
  technique: "weighted_scoring"
  facilitator: "prioritization-analyst"

  criteria:
    - name: "Customer Value"
      weight: 0.40
    - name: "Strategic Fit"
      weight: 0.25
    - name: "Effort"
      weight: 0.20
      inverse: true
    - name: "Risk"
      weight: 0.15
      inverse: true

  items:
    - id: "FEAT-001"
      name: "User Dashboard"
      scores:
        customer_value: 5
        strategic_fit: 4
        effort: 3
        risk: 4
      weighted_score: 4.20
      priority: 1
      rationale: "Highest customer value, manageable effort"

    - id: "FEAT-002"
      name: "API Integration"
      scores:
        customer_value: 3
        strategic_fit: 5
        effort: 4
        risk: 3
      weighted_score: 3.75
      priority: 2
      rationale: "Strong strategic alignment"

  moscow_summary:
    must: ["FEAT-001"]
    should: ["FEAT-002", "FEAT-003"]
    could: ["FEAT-004"]
    wont: ["FEAT-005"]

Mermaid Visualizations

Value-Effort Matrix:

quadrantChart
    title Prioritization Matrix
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins
    quadrant-4 Money Pits
    "Feature A": [0.2, 0.9]
    "Feature B": [0.3, 0.7]
    "Feature C": [0.7, 0.8]
    "Feature D": [0.8, 0.3]
    "Feature E": [0.2, 0.2]

MoSCoW Distribution:

pie title MoSCoW Distribution
    "Must" : 3
    "Should" : 4
    "Could" : 5
    "Won't" : 2

When to Use Each Technique

Technique Best For Team Size Time Required
MoSCoW Sprint/release planning Any 30-60 min
Kano Product features Product team 2-4 hours
Weighted Scoring Complex trade-offs Cross-functional 1-2 hours
Value vs Effort Quick triage Any 15-30 min
RICE Product roadmap Product team 1-2 hours
WSJF Continuous flow SAFe teams 30-60 min

Common Pitfalls

Pitfall Prevention
Everything is "Must" Enforce category limits (60% capacity)
HiPPO (highest paid person's opinion) Use objective scoring criteria
Ignoring effort Always consider cost/effort dimension
Static prioritization Re-prioritize regularly as context changes
Overcomplicating Start simple, add complexity only if needed
Ignoring dependencies Map dependencies before finalizing order

Integration

Upstream

  • Requirements - Items to prioritize
  • stakeholder-analysis - Stakeholder input on value
  • swot-pestle-analysis - Strategic context

Downstream

  • Sprint planning - Ordered backlog
  • Roadmaps - Prioritized initiatives
  • decision-analysis - Detailed option evaluation

Related Skills

  • decision-analysis - For complex option evaluation
  • stakeholder-analysis - Stakeholder input on priorities
  • risk-analysis - Risk dimension of prioritization
  • capability-mapping - Capability investment prioritization

Version History

  • v1.0.0 (2025-12-26): Initial release