4 min lectura • Guide 549 of 877
How to Prioritize Product Backlog for Development?
How to prioritize product backlog for development?
Prioritize backlog by combining business value, technical risk, dependencies, and effort. Use frameworks like WSJF, MoSCoW, or RICE. In GitScrum, order tasks in Backlog column, use labels for priority levels, and document rationale in NoteVault. Teams with well-prioritized backlogs deliver 30% more value [Source: Product Management Research 2024].
Prioritization process:
- Gather items - All work in Backlog
- Define criteria - What drives priority
- Score items - Using framework
- Order backlog - Top to bottom
- Add labels - Priority levels
- Document - Key decisions
- Review regularly - Continuous refinement
Prioritization frameworks
| Framework | Formula | Best For |
|---|---|---|
| WSJF | Cost of Delay ÷ Job Size | Lean/SAFe teams |
| RICE | (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort | Product teams |
| MoSCoW | Must, Should, Could, Won't | Scope decisions |
| Value vs Effort | 2×2 matrix | Quick decisions |
| Kano | Delighters vs basics | Feature analysis |
WSJF scoring
| Factor | Description |
|---|---|
| Business value | Revenue, satisfaction |
| Time criticality | Urgency |
| Risk reduction | Uncertainty removed |
| Job size | Effort estimate |
RICE scoring
| Factor | Description |
|---|---|
| Reach | Users impacted |
| Impact | Value per user |
| Confidence | Certainty level |
| Effort | Team effort |
MoSCoW categories
| Category | Definition |
|---|---|
| Must have | Critical, non-negotiable |
| Should have | Important, but not critical |
| Could have | Desirable if time permits |
| Won't have | Out of scope for now |
GitScrum backlog organization
| Approach | Implementation |
|---|---|
| Order by priority | Drag to position |
| Priority labels | p1, p2, p3, p4 |
| Ready column | Groomed items |
| Epic grouping | Related tasks |
Priority labels
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| p1-critical | Must do immediately |
| p2-high | Important, next |
| p3-medium | Normal priority |
| p4-low | Eventually |
Backlog health indicators
| Healthy | Unhealthy |
|---|---|
| Top items groomed | Everything vague |
| Clear priorities | No clear order |
| Right-sized items | Too big/small |
| Regular refinement | Stale backlog |
| Stakeholder aligned | Conflicting priorities |
Backlog refinement cadence
| Activity | Frequency |
|---|---|
| Top 10 review | Weekly |
| Full backlog | Monthly |
| New items | As they arrive |
| Priority conflicts | Immediately |
| Stakeholder input | Quarterly |
Balancing priorities
| Balance | Approach |
|---|---|
| Features vs bugs | Allocate capacity |
| Quick wins vs big | Mix in sprints |
| Tech debt vs features | 10-20% for debt |
| Customer vs internal | Value-based |
Common prioritization mistakes
| Mistake | Better Approach |
|---|---|
| HiPPO (boss decides) | Framework-based |
| First in, first out | Value-based order |
| Everything urgent | Force rank |
| Never changing | Continuous refinement |
| No stakeholder input | Regular alignment |
Documenting priority decisions
| Document | Content |
|---|---|
| Priority rationale | Why this order |
| Trade-off decisions | What we chose not to do |
| Stakeholder feedback | Input received |
| Review notes | What changed |