You're juggling conflicting stakeholder demands. How do you decide which features take priority?

In my experience as a lawyer, clarity of purpose is crucial when juggling conflicting stakeholder demands. Effective prioritization begins with a thorough understanding of the needs and expectations of all parties involved. Engaging in detailed discussions with stakeholders helps uncover the underlying business objectives behind each feature request, revealing their true value, which may not be immediately apparent. It's essential to align these demands with the strategic goals of the project and the organization. If everyone knows "if we do this, then we will achieve that," it fosters a collective understanding and a shared vision. However, if stakeholders operate in isolation, the entire organization suffers.

Conflicting stakeholder demands? Prioritize features with the biggest impact on your project's core goals (accuracy, user experience, etc.). Use the RICE framework (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) to score features, and leverage data analysis to identify impactful ones. Consider launching a minimum viable product (MVP) first. Finally, communicate your prioritization process with stakeholders, explaining trade-offs and remaining open to feedback. Focus on achieving the project's goals while addressing stakeholder needs.

To prioritize conflicting stakeholder demands, I use the "Impact-Story Matrix." First, I evaluate each feature's potential impact on the business and customer satisfaction. Then, I craft a compelling narrative for each feature, imagining how it would be presented as a success story in a future company meeting. The features with the highest impact and most inspiring stories are prioritized, as they are more likely to drive enthusiasm and alignment across stakeholders

To prioritize work efficiently, it is crucial to carefully understand the needs and expectations of our stakeholders. We have to actively engaging with them to gain intuitions into their significances and the underlying reasons for their demands helps identify common goals and areas where compromises can be made.

When juggling conflicting stakeholder demands, prioritizing features requires a strategic approach. Start by aligning with your overall business objectives to ensure that the most critical goals are met. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the potential impact and feasibility of each feature. Engage in open dialogue with stakeholders to understand their perspectives and urgency. Use data-driven insights to assess market needs and customer preferences. Lastly, consider the long-term vision and scalability of the features. This balanced approach helps in making informed decisions that align with both immediate needs and future growth.

Every demand from stakeholder should be analyzed to check what value in brings. Being data driven is the key. Avoid influence based on position or vocal folks.

After understanding the requirements, we need to assess how each feature aligns with the overall business objectives and strategic goals. Features that directly contribute to these goals should take precedence. Assessing the potential ROI for separately feature is also crucial, and those with the maximum ROI should be prioritized.

O impacto de uma demanda deve ser avaliado para entender o qu?o crítica ela é e se o negócio pode continuar operacional sem ela. Algumas demandas, embora valiosas, podem ter custos de desenvolvimento que as tornam menos atrativas. Avaliar o qu?o crítica é a demanda nos oferece insights valiosos que aprimoram nossa tomada de decis?o.

In a product development cycle, we had to prioritize features for a new release. One feature, suggested by the engineering team for technical improvements, seemed critical for system performance but lacked direct user impact. Through a detailed ROI analysis and stakeholder discussions, we found that another feature, focused on enhancing user interface customization, aligned closely with market demands and user feedback from beta testing. Prioritizing the user-centric feature not only boosted user satisfaction and retention but also strengthened our competitive edge in the market.

Project Postmortem is the word that’s used frequently. What it really means is to understand the journey through the process of delivery and access impact after delivery. Due to a lot of different priorities many times we tend to overlook this process. Without analyzing what went well and what did not go well through the journey we will never understand what we can improve further. We are so focus to deliver and celebrate at the end that we always forget the path that we took. Rather than wait for the end of the project. It’s always better to analyze at every milestone. Learn from it , rectify any deficiencies and then go to the next milestone.

Risk analysis is crucial in determining feature priority. First, we need to evaluate the risks associated with each feature, including technical, market, and operational risks. After reviewing all features, we should prioritize those that help mitigate significant risks or dependencies that could impact the project or business.

Risk analysis is a daily tracking endeavor. Everyday spend time to mitigate risk. When an event happens then risks were not access. The process is predictive than reactive. Risks can be very much people and competence centric or events not within our control. Risk assessment at the beginning of the project can change weekly. A dashboard tracker is important and impact of each an every risk needs to be documented. Risks with highest probability and impact needs to be solved first and then go down the list. The list will always be dynamic and most important is to be transparent and manage them through early escalation is critical.

I’d say that it’s always about risks in software development. So, when you’re facing conflicting requests, start with those because any simple detail might put your entire project in jeopardy, and you don’t want that. The main question is not simply what features have bigger or more impactful risks, but what risks you and your team are more prepared to mitigate. It may be connected to skills, project infrastructure, technologies already in use, anything. So when analyzing the risks I usually evaluate them on the scale of ‘how ready we are to face it’. The one thing that is a firm ‘no’ to me is potential legal repercussions. I prefer to promptly explain everything to the stakeholders and insist on not taking the road that can lead to that

Most conflicts among stakeholders are solved by comparing influence to authority. Basically, the bigger fish wins. But an alternative is to have those stakeholders try to resolve the conflict amongst themselves. Now, I recognize that's not always possible. But if they can talk it out and come to an agreement, it makes your job easier. In the event that a tie breaker is needed, make sure everyone agrees who gets to call the shot. Then, make sure all stakeholders sign off. The last thing you want is upset stakeholders caught off guard by a random tie breaker.

1. Use MoSCoW Method to categorize features into Must-Have, Should-Have, Could-Have, and Won’t-Have. 2. Use Kano Model to classify features based on their ability to satisfy customer needs and differentiate the product. 3. Use Weighted Scoring to assign weights to various criteria (e.g., business value, user impact, technical feasibility) and score each feature accordingly.

WSJF-Weighted Shortest Job First is used in Scaled Agile framework. The formula for WSJF is as follows: WSJF = CoD / Job Duration WSJF helps teams make informed decisions about which work items to focus on first, ensuring that the most valuable and time-sensitive work is addressed promptly. It depends on the company about deciding the criteria for priority

The simple answer is that you don't; your stakeholders do. Sure, you can use tools like MoSCoW, Kano, WSJF, PiDOOMA, etc., but those are just tools used to help your stakeholders articulate their arguments. At the end of the day, if the stakeholders can't figure it out or out-maneuver each other, then the lowest-level executive they both share will do it for them.

Keeping a stakeholder matrix helps to visualize the influence and interest of each stakeholder. This helps to prioritize each request.

"Reviewing prioritization and current sprint tasks is crucial for effective planning of the next sprint and activities. Priorities may shift from time to time, so it's essential to keep all stakeholders aligned with the overarching goals."

Consider which features provides high impact and value. Use WSJF if you can. There are multiple prioritization techniques like MoSCoW, KANO model, Value vs Timeline matrix.