Feature Prioritization

So - I’ve been asked to lead something I, myself have never done before… feature prioritization. I have a group of UX people including myself, 2 other designers and 2 researchers. Research has been completed on this large general “set of problems” - we’ve run some workshops and have come up with a list of possible features we’d like to suggest to some C-level type people and leaders as their options. (note that in some cases we were told to suggest multiple ways of fixing the same problem - like do you want the easy/bandaid fix vs the more complex but more complete fix - this was a request per my manager). – So basically right now we have 5 main “problems” with this particular internal site, and then a list of possible features or solutions for that problem - at varying levels (sm/med/lrg).

What would you recommend as the easiest or best (or both preferrably) way for us to prioritize these features - while we are all working remotely. We’ve been doing whiteboarding within InVision for the workshops so we could do something there with virutal stickies - or I could also just have a shared excel sheet. I just have seen so many ways of doing this I feel I am chasing my tail. We will have a dev estimate effort for us outside of this meeting to add into the equation as well. Please help point me in the right direction - I just feel really - stressed about figuring this out and doing it right - quickly…

I tend to organize things by the Kano model, and then prioritize within each category.

A quick primer if you’re unaware of the Kano model:

The Kano model was developed in the 1980s by Professor Noriaki Kano. Under the Kano Model, features are categorized according to needs and expectations of customers. There are a variety of versions of the Kano model. The original, however, classifies items using five thresholds: Must-be, Attractive, One-Dimensional, Indifferent, and Reverse.

Must-Be — These are expected by your customers. They are features that will not WOW them. They must be included in your product, and are often taken for granted.

Attractive — These make users happy when they’re there, but don’t disappoint them when they’re not.

One-Dimensional — These are features that make users happy when they’re there, unhappy when they’re not.

Indifferent — These have no impact on customer satisfaction levels. For example, refactoring parts of your code so that it is easier to read and understand. There is no direct value to the customer, but it will make it easier for you to maintain in the future.

Reverse — These make users unhappy when they’re there, happy when they’re not. For example, you might implement high-security features requiring an extra step to login. However, if customers do not value enhanced security, they will become dissatisfied with the extra step.

3 Likes

Thanks so much again. I’ll try to use this today. I feel like I am chasing my tail so much on this project learning things I’ve never had to do before :). I mean in some ways it is fun and in others just very stressful!

1 Like

We used it today and I think it went really well. Previously we had things organized into “small/med/lrg” grouped by effort, but I think it makes so much more sense to do it by the things that will have the most impact or even necessities that have to take place before some of the other items in the “attractive” category. I am going to talk to my boss today and hope I can get her on the same page with presenting them this way.

1 Like

Nice! I’m glad to hear it worked out okay!