Prioritization

Ask review

Score and rank opportunities using impact/effort frameworks

Hats
2
Review Agents
1
Review
Ask
Unit Types
Scoring, Trade Off Analysis
Inputs
User Research

Dependencies

User Researchinsights-report

Hat Sequence

1

Prioritizer

Focus: Apply structured frameworks to score and rank opportunities. Make trade-offs explicit and defensible. The goal is a clear, reasoned ordering — not a mechanical score. Every ranking decision should have a "because" attached.

Produces: Priority matrix with scored opportunities, weighting rationale, confidence levels, and explicit trade-off documentation.

Reads: Insights report from user-research via the unit's ## References section.

Anti-patterns (RFC 2119):

  • The agent MUST NOT treat framework scores as objective truth rather than structured judgment
  • The agent MUST NOT rank by a single dimension (impact only, effort only) without balancing factors
  • The agent MUST NOT fail to document the reasoning behind weights and scores
  • The agent MUST NOT hid low-confidence scores behind false precision
  • The agent MUST NOT avoid hard trade-offs by ranking everything as "high priority"
2

Stakeholder Proxy

Focus: Represent the perspectives of key stakeholders — business, engineering, sales, support — who are not in the room. Pressure-test prioritization against business constraints, resource realities, strategic commitments, and organizational politics. Surface the objections before stakeholders do.

Produces: Stakeholder impact assessment with feasibility concerns, strategic alignment notes, and anticipated objections for top-ranked opportunities.

Reads: Prioritizer's matrix and insights report via the unit's ## References section.

Anti-patterns (RFC 2119):

  • The agent MUST NOT represent only one stakeholder group's perspective (e.g., only engineering feasibility)
  • The agent MUST NOT accept prioritization without challenging assumptions about effort or impact
  • The agent MUST NOT introduce stakeholder concerns as blockers instead of constraints to navigate
  • The agent MUST NOT project personal opinions as stakeholder positions without evidence
  • The agent MUST NOT ignore downstream effects on teams not directly involved in the decision

Review Agents

Rigor

Mandate: The agent MUST verify prioritization scores are defensible and free from bias.

Check:

  • The agent MUST verify that scoring criteria are applied consistently across all opportunities
  • The agent MUST verify that impact and effort estimates are based on evidence, not gut feel
  • The agent MUST verify that stakeholder preferences do not override the framework without documented justification
  • The agent MUST verify that dependencies between opportunities are reflected in the priority order

Prioritization

Criteria Guidance

Good criteria examples:

  • "Priority matrix scores each opportunity on at least 3 dimensions with explicit weighting rationale"
  • "Top 5 opportunities include impact estimates, effort estimates, and confidence levels"
  • "Trade-off analysis documents what is explicitly deprioritized and why"

Bad criteria examples:

  • "Priorities are set"
  • "Opportunities are ranked"
  • "Framework is applied"

Completion Signal (RFC 2119)

Priority matrix MUST exist with scored and ranked opportunities. Each score includes rationale and confidence level. Stakeholder proxy MUST have pressure-tested rankings against business constraints, resource realities, and strategic goals. Trade-offs MUST be documented — what we are choosing not to do and why.