Feature Prioritization and Roadmapping

The Prioritization Problem

In the previous lesson, we explored writing prds and feature specs. Now let’s build on that foundation. You have 47 features in your backlog. Engineering capacity for 8 this quarter. Everyone thinks their feature is the most important. Sales wants Feature A because a deal depends on it. The CEO wants Feature B because a competitor launched it. Engineering wants Feature C because it reduces technical debt.

Welcome to the core PM challenge: deciding what NOT to build.

Without a framework, prioritization becomes a political exercise. The loudest voice wins. With a framework, it becomes a structured conversation where assumptions are explicit and trade-offs are visible.

AI makes applying these frameworks dramatically faster.

RICE Framework: The PM Standard

RICE stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort. It produces a score that helps rank features.

• Reach: How many users will this affect per quarter?
• Impact: How much will this move the target metric per user? (3=massive, 2=high, 1=medium, 0.5=low, 0.25=minimal)
• Confidence: How sure are you about your estimates? (100%=high, 80%=medium, 50%=low)
• Effort: How many person-months will this take?

Score = (Reach x Impact x Confidence) / Effort

Help me RICE score these features for prioritization:

Product context: [product description]
Key metric we're optimizing for: [metric, e.g., activation rate, retention]
Quarterly active users: [number]

Features to score:
1. [Feature name]: [brief description]
2. [Feature name]: [brief description]
3. [Feature name]: [brief description]
[... continue for all features]

For each feature, estimate:
- Reach: How many users per quarter will encounter this? Explain reasoning.
- Impact: How much will it move [metric] per user? (3/2/1/0.5/0.25) Justify.
- Confidence: How certain are we? (100/80/50) What would increase confidence?
- Effort: Person-months to build. Include design, dev, and QA.

Calculate the RICE score and rank all features.

Then separately flag:
- Any scores you have low confidence in
- Dependencies between features that affect ordering
- Strategic factors the scores don't capture

Beyond RICE: Alternative Frameworks

RICE isn’t the only option. Different situations call for different frameworks:

ICE (Impact, Confidence, Ease): Simpler than RICE. Good for growth experiments where reach is hard to estimate.

MoSCoW (Must, Should, Could, Won’t): Better for scope decisions within a fixed timeline. “Given our launch date, what must be in v1?”

Value vs. Effort Matrix: Visual 2x2 grid. Quick wins (high value, low effort) go first. Big bets (high value, high effort) need commitment. Time sinks (low value, high effort) get cut.

Weighted Scoring: Custom criteria with weights. Good when your prioritization needs to balance multiple factors.

I need to prioritize these features using a weighted scoring model:

Features: [list features]

Criteria and weights:
1. User impact (weight: [1-5]): How much does this improve user experience?
2. Revenue impact (weight: [1-5]): How much does this drive revenue?
3. Strategic alignment (weight: [1-5]): How well does this fit our strategy?
4. Technical feasibility (weight: [1-5]): How buildable is this given
   our current architecture?
5. [Custom criterion] (weight: [1-5]): [description]

Score each feature 1-5 on each criterion. Explain each score briefly.
Calculate weighted totals and rank.

Then: which features would you group into logical release bundles?

The Roadmapping Process

Prioritized features need to become a roadmap – a time-based plan that communicates what you’ll build and roughly when.

The roadmap hierarchy:

• Now: Currently being built (high detail)
• Next: Coming in 1-2 quarters (medium detail)
• Later: On the horizon (low detail, directional)

Help me create a roadmap from these prioritized features:

Prioritized features (in order):
[paste your ranked list with RICE scores]

Constraints:
- Engineering team size: [number of engineers]
- This quarter's remaining capacity: [person-months]
- Next quarter's capacity: [person-months]
- Hard deadlines: [any date-driven commitments]
- Dependencies: [features that must come before others]

Create a roadmap with:
1. NOW (this quarter): What can we realistically ship?
2. NEXT (next quarter): What's planned based on current priorities?
3. LATER (2+ quarters): What's directional?

For each item in NOW and NEXT:
- Estimated start and end dates
- Team members/skills needed
- Dependencies and risks
- Key milestone for progress tracking

Flag any conflicts: features that won't fit the capacity, dependency
loops, or unrealistic timelines.

Handling Pushback on Priorities

Every PM faces pushback. “Why isn’t my feature higher?” Here’s how to handle it:

When sales pushes for a customer-specific feature:

Sales is pushing for [feature] because [customer/deal]. Help me evaluate
this request:

1. If we build it, what's the impact beyond this one customer?
2. What's the opportunity cost -- what gets delayed?
3. Is there a smaller version that satisfies the immediate need?
4. What precedent does building customer-specific features set?
5. How do I say "not now" in a way that maintains the relationship
   with sales?

Draft a response that acknowledges the business need while explaining
the trade-off.

When leadership overrides your prioritization:

The CEO wants us to prioritize [feature] that I've ranked lower because
[reason]. Help me think through this:

1. What strategic context might the CEO have that isn't in my RICE model?
2. Is the CEO right? Am I underweighting something?
3. If we move this up, what specifically gets delayed?
4. How do I present the trade-off clearly so the CEO makes an informed
   decision?
5. If the decision stands, how do I adjust the roadmap?

I want to be a good collaborator while ensuring leadership understands
the cost.

Quick Check: Prioritization Pitfalls

Watch for these common mistakes:

The Roadmap Review Cycle

Your roadmap isn’t carved in stone. Review and adjust:

• Weekly: Are current items on track? Blockers?
• Monthly: Any new information that changes priorities?
• Quarterly: Full reprioritization with fresh RICE scores

It's time for my quarterly roadmap review. Here's the current state:

Completed this quarter: [list]
In progress: [list with status]
Delayed/cut: [list with reasons]

New information:
- User research findings: [summary]
- Business changes: [any revenue/strategy shifts]
- Competitive developments: [what competitors have done]
- Technical learnings: [what engineering discovered]

Help me:
1. Score any new feature requests using RICE
2. Re-evaluate existing priorities given new information
3. Recommend roadmap adjustments for next quarter
4. Identify any features that should be cut entirely
5. Flag risks for next quarter's plan

Exercise: Prioritize Your Current Backlog

Take your actual backlog (or at least the top 10-15 items) and run through this process:

1. RICE score each item using the AI prompt
2. Review the scores – do they match your intuition? Where they don’t, explore why.
3. Create a Now/Next/Later roadmap based on the scores and your capacity
4. Identify the top three pushback points you’d expect from stakeholders
5. Prepare responses using the pushback handling prompts

Save your scored backlog. This becomes the starting point for your next planning cycle and a historical record of how priorities have evolved.

Key Takeaways

• Prioritization frameworks make assumptions explicit and create common language for trade-off discussions
• RICE is the PM standard: Reach x Impact x Confidence / Effort – but the conversation matters more than the scores
• Choose frameworks based on the situation: RICE for general prioritization, MoSCoW for scope decisions, value/effort for quick sorting
• Roadmaps use Now/Next/Later structure – high detail for current work, directional for future work
• Handle pushback by presenting trade-offs clearly – “we can do X, but Y gets delayed”
• Override the framework when you have genuine strategic context it doesn’t capture – but document why
• Review and reprioritize quarterly; new information changes optimal priorities

Next: Systematically analyzing your competitive landscape and identifying market opportunities.

Up next: In the next lesson, we’ll dive into Competitive Analysis and Market Research.