Feature Prioritization
Welcome to the next lesson of UX design. In the previous article, we learn how to define user goals and user flows, link to the previous article.
In this article, you’re going to define how to prioritize your features. What makes them important and how to actually add value to your product or features.
Why is Prioritization Necessary?
You need to pay attention to what adds value to the user’s experience. Remember that it is far simpler to extend established habits than it is to push them to do something entirely new. Thus, it is critical to concentrate on what the majority of consumers are attempting to accomplish. Don’t get sidetracked by those who insist you must satisfy every single edge case because you don’t.
Prioritization Methods
1. 2x2 Matrix
The 2x2 prioritization technique provides a visual framework for professionals and teams to select which product or features to concentrate on next. The approach entails creating a four-quadrant priority matrix grid. The horizontal axis is labeled “effort,” while the vertical axis is labeled “importance.”
Each quadrant in this grid, sometimes known as a “4 square,” will be labeled with one of the following:
- High value, low effort
- Low value, low effort
- High value, high effort
- Low value, high effort
The team then inserts each product backlog or task on the graph in the proper location based on the item’s projected value as well as the work necessary to finish it. When they look at their finished 22 grid, the team knows exactly what to work on and in what sequence.
2. Dot Voting
Dot voting is a basic technique used in a group environment to democratically rank things or makes choices. It is a simple, basic method for narrowing down options and settling on a collection of thoughts or ideas.
In dot voting, each member of a group is given a number of tokens (“dots”) that may be allocated to one of a set of options.
3. MoSCoW
This is my favorite method of prioritization, which involves taking features and sorting them into one category of the list: Must, Should, Could, Won’t. The product team should aim to deliver as many of the should requirements as possible. Can result in feature bloat if fewer features would accomplish the same major goals. ‘Could’ requirements do not affect the overall success of the product.
- M — Must have this requirement to meet the business needs.
- S — Should have this requirement if possible, but product success does not rely on it.
- C — Could have this requirement if it does not affect anything else in the product.
- W — Would like to have this requirement later, but it won’t be delivered this time.
4. Now Next Later
NOW and NEXT are effectively the goals for the quarter, and LATER is the longer-term roadmap.
The framing of this, is very simple to start because it lulls people into a sense of certain that they’re going to get all the features they personally want — note that there’s no “never” option. In reality, sometimes those “nice-to-have” features get reprioritized way down the list, based on new information.
Stakeholders can sometimes feel like you’re taking stuff away from them and react badly; it’s better to pit all the features against one another and prioritize based on what’s aligned with your goals. Moreover, it forces the team to prioritize in relation to goals.
Conclusion
Common challenges when you try to prioritizing the features of your product would be:
- Muddled, cluttered or convoluted hierarchy
- Lots of elements competing for attention; no clear purpose
- Difficult to diagnose because it feels like “everything’s in there that we wanted”
- Result of no consensus around priorities — no clear decisions re: what’s most important, so users receive mixed messages about what’s important
Thus, you can use scope creep to help with the decision you have to make. In an ideal product, the stakeholders would work together to try to find where their needs overlap and focus on just implementing that. Workshopping techniques and group sketching sessions can create a shared sense of ownership to combat that.
