Agile Methods Every Product Owner Should Know

In the ever-changing landscape of IT engineering, agility isn’t just an approach—it’s a necessity. As a product owner, you’re the conductor of a complex symphony of ideas, resources, and time constraints, all revolving around one ultimate goal: delivering value to your end users.

The key to achieving this lies not only in understanding what to deliver, but also in determining the order in which to deliver it. This is where the art and science of prioritization comes into play. Prioritization, in the context of agile development, is a critical practice that helps teams decide where to focus their limited resources to maximize the value delivered to the customer.

This practice isn’t without its challenges. As product owners, we’re often faced with a deluge of features, bugs, enhancements, and technical debt, all competing for attention.

The question that frequently arises is, “How do we choose what to work on first?” It’s a question that’s simple to ask, but complex to answer.

There are a multitude of prioritization methods available—each with its unique approach and focus. From the Kano Model and Opportunity Scoring, which place a premium on user feedback, to the MoSCoW Model and Priority Poker, which emphasize stakeholder input, to methods like the Cost of Delay and Stack Ranking, which revolve around financial implications and feature comparison respectively. The key to effective prioritization lies in understanding these methods and knowing when to apply each one.

Through the course of this article, I will delve into the nuances of these prioritization methods, focusing on the circumstances that might influence the choice of one over the other. My goal is to empower you, fellow product owners, with a deeper understanding of how to navigate these methods to deliver the most value to your customers and stakeholders.

We’ve all been there. We have this goldmine of user feedback - a mix of praises, criticisms, and suggestions - and we’re stumped on how to use it to our advantage. When user feedback is crucial, a couple of methods stand out as particularly useful: the Kano Model and Opportunity Scoring.

Let’s start with the Kano Model. It’s like a sorting hat for your feedback, neatly classifying them into must-haves, nice-to-haves, and delighters. These categories give you a clear understanding of what your users see as essential, what they see as bonuses, and what would truly impress them. It’s a great way to make sense of a flood of feedback and turn it into an actionable plan. The best part is, it gives you a visual representation of what needs to be prioritized. And who doesn’t love a good visual aid? It’s simple, it’s clear, and it’s a great way to get everyone on the same page about what matters most to your users.

On the other hand, we have Opportunity Scoring. This method takes things a step further. It doesn’t just sort feedback; it anticipates it. It takes your user research data and, like a crystal ball, shows you what your users are likely to expect from your product. It’s a great way to get a step ahead of your users and shape your schedule to meet their expectations before they even voice them out. It ensures you’re investing your resources wisely, focusing on what your users will find valuable rather than what might just be a waste of time.

So, when user feedback is crucial to your decision-making process, remember the Kano Model and Opportunity Scoring. One helps you sort and prioritize feedback, and the other helps you anticipate and meet user expectations. Both will ensure your product development is driven by what your users really want and need.

There are times when the decision-making power rests predominantly within the organization. It’s when the stakeholders in your company have the final say. In this scenario, the methods that come to the fore are Priority Poker, the $100 Test, and the MoSCoW Model.

Priority Poker is reminiscent of a high-stakes poker game where the right decision can lead to a huge payoff. The method gathers all stakeholders to cast their votes on the significance of each task and feature. This democratic approach ensures that everyone has a say, and the collective wisdom of the group is used to create a prioritized schedule. It’s a powerful way to engage stakeholders and ensure that their knowledge and insights are fully utilized.

Next, we have the 100 Dollar Test. Similar to Priority Poker, it provides each stakeholder with a virtual $100 bill, and they get to ‘spend’ it on the features they deem most important. It’s like a market simulation where each stakeholder is a consumer, and the features are products. The ones that receive the most ‘investment’ are deemed to be the most valuable. It’s a great way to visually represent stakeholder preference and to drive consensus among the group.

Lastly, there’s the MoSCoW Model. This prioritization method categorizes features into four groups - Must-haves, Should-haves, Could-haves, and Won’t-haves. It’s a straightforward way to figure out what’s essential, what’s desirable, and what’s superfluous, making it a great tool for decision-making.

When internal stakeholders hold the reins, these methods can help guide their decisions. Priority Poker and the $100 Test provide a democratic process that gathers collective wisdom, while the MoSCoW Model provides a clear, categorical method for decision-making. All three ensure that the stakeholders' voices are heard and their insights are effectively utilized.

There are also situations when money talks louder than anything else. When financial considerations take the lead in your prioritization process, you need a method that can measure and assess the financial impact of each feature or task. That’s when the Cost of Delay model becomes extremely relevant.

The Cost of Delay model is all about understanding the financial implications of postponing a feature or task. If delaying a feature costs your company a significant amount of money each day, then it’s a clear sign that this feature should be high up on your priority list. This method is a proactive approach to firefighting, helping you avoid expensive emergencies by highlighting the potential financial pitfalls of delay.

While it might seem that this method focuses solely on financial considerations, it’s important to remember that user experience and customer satisfaction often have financial implications as well. Poor user experience can lead to customer churn, and high customer satisfaction can increase customer retention, both of which have direct financial impacts. So, while the Cost of Delay model might look like it’s all about the money, it also indirectly considers user experience and customer satisfaction.

The Cost of Delay model is particularly useful when your product development is closely tied to financial objectives, such as hitting revenue targets or controlling costs. It helps you make decisions that are financially sound and that align with your company’s financial goals.

At times, the crux of the matter lies in comparing the features themselves. This is particularly common when you’re dealing with complex products with a wide array of features and functionalities. In such cases, the prioritization methods that shine are Stack Ranking and Value vs. Effort.

Stack Ranking is a method that forces you to compare features against one another to determine their relative importance. It’s like a contest where features go head-to-head, and the ones that come out on top are the ones that get prioritized. The beauty of this method lies in its simplicity. There’s no complex scoring system or intricate analysis involved. It’s all about comparing features and making judgment calls on which ones are more crucial.

However, the simplicity of Stack Ranking doesn’t mean it’s easy. Being able to compare features effectively requires a deep understanding of your product and your users. You need to be able to put yourself in your customers' shoes and ask: Which features will simplify their user experience? Which ones will meet their needs and expectations? The answers to these questions will guide your decisions and help you prioritize effectively.

On the other hand, the Value vs. Effort method is about assessing each feature’s potential impact (value) against the effort required to implement it. Features that offer high value but require little effort are the clear winners, while those that require a lot of effort but offer little value are typically pushed to the bottom of the list. This method ensures that your team’s efforts are invested in areas where they’ll have the most impact, leading to efficient use of resources and higher returns on investment.

When the nature of your product demands a close comparison of features, Stack Ranking and Value vs. Effort are the methods to turn to. They provide you with the tools to evaluate features effectively and make decisions that are informed, strategic, and aligned with your product’s needs and objectives.

In conclusion, prioritizing tasks as a Product Owner in an agile environment is no easy feat. It requires a keen understanding of different factors like user feedback, stakeholder preferences, financial considerations, and the importance of comparing features. The good news is, there are a variety of prioritization methods at your disposal to help navigate these complex considerations.

Remember, the Kano Model and Opportunity Scoring are particularly effective when user feedback is crucial. They allow you to factor in customer expectations and preferences, helping you create a product that aligns with the needs and wants of your user base.

When internal stakeholders have the final say, methods like Priority Poker, $100 Test, and MoSCoW Model provide a way to make collective decisions that take into account the viewpoints and inputs of all stakeholders.

In situations where financial considerations take the lead, the Cost of Delay model can help you understand the financial implications of your decisions and prioritize accordingly.

Lastly, when comparing features is crucial, Stack Ranking and Value vs. Effort are your go-to methods. They allow for a systematic and comparative analysis of features, ensuring your resources are directed towards the most impactful ones.

However, it’s important to remember that there’s no one-size-fits-all method for task prioritization. The best approach is to maintain a flexible and adaptable stance, picking and choosing the methods that best align with your current circumstances and needs.

Embrace the diversity of these methods. Don’t limit yourself to using just one; instead, use them in combination, adjusting and tweaking as necessary. The goal isn’t to find the perfect prioritization method but to make the most of the resources at your disposal.

As a Product Owner, your mission is to steer the product development process in a way that delivers maximum value. And with these prioritization methods in your toolkit, you’re well-equipped to make informed, strategic decisions that drive your product towards success.

Remember, prioritization is not just about organizing tasks—it’s about strategic decision-making. And with the right methods at hand, you’ll be making decisions that are not only strategic but also effective, leading your product down the path to success.

---

Note: This was first published as a LinkedIn article.