prioritization

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English

🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

Prioritization

优先级排序

Systematically rank and prioritize requirements, features, backlog items, and initiatives using proven prioritization frameworks. Supports MoSCoW, Kano model, weighted scoring, and value-effort analysis.

使用经过验证的优先级排序框架，系统地对需求、功能、待办事项和行动计划进行排序和优先级划分。支持MoSCoW、Kano模型、加权评分和价值-努力分析。

What is Prioritization?

什么是优先级排序？

Prioritization is the process of determining relative importance and ordering of items to focus resources on what matters most. Effective prioritization balances:

Value: Benefit to customers or business
Effort: Cost, time, and resources required
Risk: Uncertainty and potential downsides
Dependencies: Constraints and sequencing

优先级排序是确定各项工作相对重要性并排序的过程，以便将资源集中在最关键的事项上。有效的优先级排序需要平衡以下因素：

价值：为客户或业务带来的收益
努力：所需的成本、时间和资源
风险：不确定性和潜在负面影响
依赖关系：约束条件和执行顺序

Prioritization Techniques

优先级排序技术

MoSCoW Method

MoSCoW方法

Categorical prioritization for timeboxed delivery:

Category	Definition	Guidance
Must	Non-negotiable, required for success	Without these, delivery is a failure
Should	Important but not critical	Significant value, workarounds exist
Could	Desirable if resources permit	Nice to have, enhances experience
Won't	Explicitly excluded this time	Not now, maybe later

When to Use: Sprint planning, release scoping, MVP definition, timeboxed projects

Rules:

Musts should be ~60% of capacity (leave room for unknowns)
Won'ts are explicitly stated (not silently dropped)
Categories are relative to the timebox, not absolute

适用于时间限定交付的分类式优先级排序：

类别	定义	指导原则
Must（必须有）	非协商项，是成功的必要条件	缺少这些内容，交付即失败
Should（应该有）	重要但非关键项	能带来显著价值，存在替代方案
Could（可以有）	资源允许时的理想项	锦上添花，提升体验
Won't（暂不做）	明确排除在本次范围外的项	现在不做，以后可能考虑

适用场景： 迭代规划、发布范围定义、MVP确定、时间限定项目

规则：

Must项应占容量的约60%（为未知情况预留空间）
Won't项需明确说明（而非默默取消）
分类是相对于时间周期的，而非绝对的

Kano Model

Kano模型

Customer satisfaction-based classification:

Category	If Present	If Absent	Detection
Basic (Must-Be)	No increase in satisfaction	Major dissatisfaction	Customers assume these exist
Performance (Linear)	Proportional satisfaction	Proportional dissatisfaction	Customers explicitly request
Delighter (Excitement)	High satisfaction	No dissatisfaction	Customers don't expect
Indifferent	No impact	No impact	No reaction either way
Reverse	Dissatisfaction	Satisfaction	Segment prefers absence

When to Use: Product feature prioritization, understanding customer needs, differentiating from competitors

Kano Questionnaire:

Functional: "How would you feel if this feature was present?"
Dysfunctional: "How would you feel if this feature was absent?"

Responses: Like it, Expect it, Neutral, Can tolerate, Dislike it

基于客户满意度的分类方法：

类别	具备时的影响	缺失时的影响	识别方式
基础型（必须具备）	不会提升满意度	会导致严重不满	客户默认这些功能存在
绩效型（线性相关）	满意度成比例提升	满意度成比例下降	客户会明确提出需求
兴奋型（惊喜功能）	大幅提升满意度	不会导致不满	客户没有预期这些功能
无差异型	无影响	无影响	客户无任何反应
反向型	导致不满	提升满意度	特定群体更偏好没有该功能

适用场景： 产品功能优先级排序、理解客户需求、差异化竞争

Kano调查问卷：

正向问题：“如果具备该功能，您的感受是？”
反向问题：“如果缺失该功能，您的感受是？”

回答选项： 喜欢、预期、中立、可容忍、厌恶

Weighted Scoring Matrix

加权评分矩阵

Multi-criteria quantitative comparison:

多标准定量比较法：

Step 1: Define Criteria

步骤1：定义评估标准

Criterion	Weight	Description
Customer Value	40%	Impact on customer satisfaction
Strategic Fit	25%	Alignment with goals
Effort	20%	Development cost (inverse)
Risk	15%	Uncertainty/failure potential (inverse)

标准	权重	描述
客户价值	40%	对客户满意度的影响
战略契合度	25%	与目标的对齐程度
投入成本	20%	开发成本（反向计分）
风险	15%	不确定性/失败可能性（反向计分）

Step 2: Score Items

步骤2：为项目打分

Item	Customer Value (1-5)	Strategic Fit (1-5)	Effort (1-5)	Risk (1-5)	Weighted Score
A	5	4	3	4	4.15
B	3	5	4	3	3.75

项目	客户价值（1-5）	战略契合度（1-5）	投入成本（1-5）	风险（1-5）	加权得分
A	5	4	3	4	4.15
B	3	5	4	3	3.75

Step 3: Calculate Weighted Score

步骤3：计算加权得分

text

Score = Σ (Weight × Score)
Item A = (0.40×5) + (0.25×4) + (0.20×3) + (0.15×4) = 4.20

When to Use: Complex trade-offs, multiple stakeholders, defensible decisions

text

Score = Σ (Weight × Score)
Item A = (0.40×5) + (0.25×4) + (0.20×3) + (0.15×4) = 4.20

适用场景： 复杂权衡、多方利益相关者、可辩护的决策

Value vs Effort Matrix

价值-努力矩阵

2×2 prioritization for quick decisions:

mermaid

quadrantChart
    title Value vs Effort
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets (Plan carefully)
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins (Do first)
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins (Do if time permits)
    quadrant-4 Money Pits (Avoid)

Quadrant	Value	Effort	Action
Quick Wins	High	Low	Do first
Big Bets	High	High	Plan carefully
Fill-ins	Low	Low	Do if time permits
Money Pits	Low	High	Avoid or deprioritize

When to Use: Fast initial triage, backlog grooming, stakeholder alignment

用于快速决策的2×2优先级排序法：

mermaid

quadrantChart
    title Value vs Effort
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets (Plan carefully)
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins (Do first)
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins (Do if time permits)
    quadrant-4 Money Pits (Avoid)

象限	价值	努力	行动建议
快速胜利	高	低	优先执行
重大赌注	高	高	仔细规划
补充工作	低	低	时间允许时执行
资金陷阱	低	高	避免或降低优先级

适用场景： 快速初步分类、待办事项梳理、利益相关者对齐

RICE Scoring

RICE评分法

Product management prioritization:

Factor	Definition	Calculation
Reach	Users/customers affected	Number per time period
Impact	Effect on each user	0.25 (minimal) to 3 (massive)
Confidence	Certainty of estimates	0.5 (low) to 1 (high)
Effort	Person-months required	Number

text

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

When to Use: Product roadmap prioritization, feature comparison

产品管理优先级排序法：

因素	定义	计算方式
Reach（覆盖范围）	受影响的用户/客户数量	单位时间内的数量
Impact（影响程度）	对每个用户的影响	0.25（极小）至3（极大）
Confidence（置信度）	估算的确定性	0.5（低）至1（高）
Effort（投入）	所需的人月数	具体数值

text

RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort

适用场景： 产品路线图优先级排序、功能对比

WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First)

WSJF（加权最短作业优先）

SAFe/Lean prioritization for flow:

text

WSJF = Cost of Delay / Job Duration

Cost of Delay = User/Business Value + Time Criticality + Risk Reduction

Factor	Score (1-20)	Description
User/Business Value	1-20	Benefit to users or business
Time Criticality	1-20	Urgency, deadlines, decay
Risk Reduction	1-20	Risk/opportunity addressed
Job Duration	1-20	Relative size (inverted)

When to Use: Continuous flow environments, maximizing value delivery

适用于SAFe/精益流程的流动优先级排序法：

text

WSJF = 延迟成本 / 作业时长

延迟成本 = 用户/业务价值 + 时间紧迫性 + 风险降低程度

因素	分值（1-20）	描述
用户/业务价值	1-20	为用户或业务带来的收益
时间紧迫性	1-20	紧急程度、截止日期、价值衰减
风险降低程度	1-20	解决的风险/抓住的机会
作业时长	1-20	相对规模（反向计分）

适用场景： 持续流动环境、最大化价值交付

Workflow

工作流程

Phase 1: Prepare

阶段1：准备

Step 1: Gather Items to Prioritize

步骤1：收集待排序项

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Prioritization Session

优先级排序会议

Date: [ISO date] Scope: [What's being prioritized] Stakeholders: [Who's involved] Constraint: [Timebox, budget, capacity]

日期： [ISO格式日期] 范围： [待排序内容] 利益相关者： [参与人员] 约束条件： 时间周期、预算、容量

Items

待排序项

ID	Description	Owner
1	[Item 1]	[Name]
2	[Item 2]	[Name]

undefined

ID	描述	负责人
1	[项1]	[姓名]
2	[项2]	[姓名]

undefined

Step 2: Select Prioritization Technique

步骤2：选择优先级排序技术

Situation	Recommended Technique
Sprint/release planning	MoSCoW
Product feature decisions	Kano + RICE
Trade-off decisions	Weighted Scoring
Quick triage	Value vs Effort
Continuous flow	WSJF
Multiple criteria	Weighted Scoring

场景	推荐技术
迭代/发布规划	MoSCoW
产品功能决策	Kano + RICE
权衡决策	加权评分
快速分类	价值-努力矩阵
持续流动	WSJF
多标准评估	加权评分

Phase 2: Execute

阶段2：执行

Step 1: Apply Selected Technique

步骤1：应用选定技术

Follow the specific technique workflow (see above).

遵循对应技术的工作流程（见上文）。

Step 2: Validate Results

步骤2：验证结果

Do top priorities align with strategy?
Are dependencies respected?
Does the team have capacity?
Are stakeholders aligned?

顶级优先级是否与战略对齐？
是否考虑了依赖关系？
团队是否有足够容量？
利益相关者是否对齐？

Step 3: Document Rationale

步骤3：记录决策依据

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Prioritization Rationale

优先级排序决策依据

Top Priorities

顶级优先级

[Item A] - Score: X
- Rationale: [Why this is top priority]
- Dependencies: [What it depends on]
[Item B] - Score: Y
- Rationale: [Why this is second]
- Dependencies: [What it depends on]

[项A] - 得分：X
- 依据：[为何是顶级优先级]
- 依赖关系：[依赖的内容]
[项B] - 得分：Y
- 依据：[为何是第二优先级]
- 依赖关系：[依赖的内容]

Deferred Items

延期项

[Item C] - Reason: [Why deferred]

undefined

[项C] - 原因：[为何延期]

undefined

Phase 3: Communicate

阶段3：沟通

Step 1: Create Prioritized Backlog

步骤1：创建已排序的待办事项

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Prioritized Backlog

已排序待办事项

Rank	Item	Priority/Score	Owner	Target
1	[Item A]	Must / 4.5	[Name]	Sprint 1
2	[Item B]	Must / 4.2	[Name]	Sprint 1
3	[Item C]	Should / 3.8	[Name]	Sprint 2

undefined

排名	项	优先级/得分	负责人	目标周期
1	[项A]	Must / 4.5	[姓名]	迭代1
2	[项B]	Must / 4.2	[姓名]	迭代1
3	[项C]	Should / 3.8	[姓名]	迭代2

undefined

Step 2: Communicate Decisions

步骤2：沟通决策

Share prioritization results with stakeholders
Explain rationale for key decisions
Address concerns about deprioritized items
Set expectations for what's not included

与利益相关者共享优先级排序结果
解释关键决策的依据
回应低优先级项的相关疑问
明确说明未包含项的预期

Output Formats

输出格式

Narrative Summary

叙述性摘要

markdown

undefined

markdown

undefined

Prioritization Summary

优先级排序摘要

Session: [Scope/context] Date: [ISO date] Technique: [MoSCoW/Kano/Weighted Scoring/etc.] Facilitator: prioritization-analyst

会议： [范围/背景] 日期： [ISO格式日期] 技术： [MoSCoW/Kano/加权评分等] 主持人： prioritization-analyst

Results Overview

结果概述

Total Items: N
Top Priority: [Count]
Deferred: [Count]

总项数： N
顶级优先级： [数量]
延期项： [数量]

Priority Distribution

优先级分布

Category	Count	%
Must/Quick Wins	X	Y%
Should/Big Bets	X	Y%
Could/Fill-ins	X	Y%
Won't/Money Pits	X	Y%

类别	数量	占比
Must/快速胜利	X	Y%
Should/重大赌注	X	Y%
Could/补充工作	X	Y%
Won't/资金陷阱	X	Y%

Key Decisions

关键决策

[Top Item]: Prioritized because [reason]
[Deferred Item]: Deferred because [reason]

[顶级项]：优先级最高的原因是[理由]
[延期项]：延期的原因是[理由]

Next Steps

下一步行动

Begin work on top priority items
Re-prioritize at [next review point]

undefined

开始执行顶级优先级项
在[下次评审点]重新进行优先级排序

undefined

Structured Data (YAML)

结构化数据（YAML）

yaml

prioritization:
  version: "1.0"
  date: "2025-01-15"
  scope: "Q1 Feature Backlog"
  technique: "weighted_scoring"
  facilitator: "prioritization-analyst"

  criteria:
    - name: "Customer Value"
      weight: 0.40
    - name: "Strategic Fit"
      weight: 0.25
    - name: "Effort"
      weight: 0.20
      inverse: true
    - name: "Risk"
      weight: 0.15
      inverse: true

  items:
    - id: "FEAT-001"
      name: "User Dashboard"
      scores:
        customer_value: 5
        strategic_fit: 4
        effort: 3
        risk: 4
      weighted_score: 4.20
      priority: 1
      rationale: "Highest customer value, manageable effort"

    - id: "FEAT-002"
      name: "API Integration"
      scores:
        customer_value: 3
        strategic_fit: 5
        effort: 4
        risk: 3
      weighted_score: 3.75
      priority: 2
      rationale: "Strong strategic alignment"

  moscow_summary:
    must: ["FEAT-001"]
    should: ["FEAT-002", "FEAT-003"]
    could: ["FEAT-004"]
    wont: ["FEAT-005"]

yaml

prioritization:
  version: "1.0"
  date: "2025-01-15"
  scope: "Q1 Feature Backlog"
  technique: "weighted_scoring"
  facilitator: "prioritization-analyst"

  criteria:
    - name: "Customer Value"
      weight: 0.40
    - name: "Strategic Fit"
      weight: 0.25
    - name: "Effort"
      weight: 0.20
      inverse: true
    - name: "Risk"
      weight: 0.15
      inverse: true

  items:
    - id: "FEAT-001"
      name: "User Dashboard"
      scores:
        customer_value: 5
        strategic_fit: 4
        effort: 3
        risk: 4
      weighted_score: 4.20
      priority: 1
      rationale: "Highest customer value, manageable effort"

    - id: "FEAT-002"
      name: "API Integration"
      scores:
        customer_value: 3
        strategic_fit: 5
        effort: 4
        risk: 3
      weighted_score: 3.75
      priority: 2
      rationale: "Strong strategic alignment"

  moscow_summary:
    must: ["FEAT-001"]
    should: ["FEAT-002", "FEAT-003"]
    could: ["FEAT-004"]
    wont: ["FEAT-005"]

Mermaid Visualizations

Mermaid可视化

Value-Effort Matrix:

mermaid

quadrantChart
    title Prioritization Matrix
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins
    quadrant-4 Money Pits
    "Feature A": [0.2, 0.9]
    "Feature B": [0.3, 0.7]
    "Feature C": [0.7, 0.8]
    "Feature D": [0.8, 0.3]
    "Feature E": [0.2, 0.2]

MoSCoW Distribution:

mermaid

pie title MoSCoW Distribution
    "Must" : 3
    "Should" : 4
    "Could" : 5
    "Won't" : 2

价值-努力矩阵：

mermaid

quadrantChart
    title Prioritization Matrix
    x-axis Low Effort --> High Effort
    y-axis Low Value --> High Value
    quadrant-1 Big Bets
    quadrant-2 Quick Wins
    quadrant-3 Fill-ins
    quadrant-4 Money Pits
    "Feature A": [0.2, 0.9]
    "Feature B": [0.3, 0.7]
    "Feature C": [0.7, 0.8]
    "Feature D": [0.8, 0.3]
    "Feature E": [0.2, 0.2]

MoSCoW分布：

mermaid

pie title MoSCoW Distribution
    "Must" : 3
    "Should" : 4
    "Could" : 5
    "Won't" : 2

When to Use Each Technique

各技术适用场景

Technique	Best For	Team Size	Time Required
MoSCoW	Sprint/release planning	Any	30-60 min
Kano	Product features	Product team	2-4 hours
Weighted Scoring	Complex trade-offs	Cross-functional	1-2 hours
Value vs Effort	Quick triage	Any	15-30 min
RICE	Product roadmap	Product team	1-2 hours
WSJF	Continuous flow	SAFe teams	30-60 min

技术	最佳用途	团队规模	所需时间
MoSCoW	迭代/发布规划	任意规模	30-60分钟
Kano模型	产品功能排序	产品团队	2-4小时
加权评分	复杂权衡决策	跨职能团队	1-2小时
价值-努力矩阵	快速初步分类	任意规模	15-30分钟
RICE评分法	产品路线图排序	产品团队	1-2小时
WSJF	持续流动环境	SAFe团队	30-60分钟

Common Pitfalls

常见陷阱

Pitfall	Prevention
Everything is "Must"	Enforce category limits (60% capacity)
HiPPO (highest paid person's opinion)	Use objective scoring criteria
Ignoring effort	Always consider cost/effort dimension
Static prioritization	Re-prioritize regularly as context changes
Overcomplicating	Start simple, add complexity only if needed
Ignoring dependencies	Map dependencies before finalizing order

陷阱	预防措施
所有项都归为“Must”	强制限制类别占比（60%容量）
HiPPO效应（最高薪人员的意见）	使用客观评分标准
忽略投入成本	始终考虑成本/投入维度
静态优先级	随环境变化定期重新排序
过度复杂化	从简单开始，仅在需要时增加复杂度
忽略依赖关系	最终确定顺序前梳理依赖关系

Integration

集成

Upstream

上游环节

Requirements - Items to prioritize
stakeholder-analysis - Stakeholder input on value
swot-pestle-analysis - Strategic context

需求管理 - 待排序的项
stakeholder-analysis - 利益相关者对价值的输入
swot-pestle-analysis - 战略背景

Downstream

下游环节

Sprint planning - Ordered backlog
Roadmaps - Prioritized initiatives
decision-analysis - Detailed option evaluation

迭代规划 - 已排序的待办事项
路线图 - 已优先级化的行动计划
decision-analysis - 详细选项评估

Related Skills

User-Facing Interface

用户界面

When invoked directly by the user, this skill operates as follows.

当用户直接调用该技能时，操作流程如下：

Arguments

参数

```
<items-or-context>
```
: Items to prioritize (inline list, file reference, or context description)
```
--mode
```
: Prioritization method (default:
```
moscow
```
)
- ```
moscow
```
  : Must/Should/Could/Won't categorization (~4K tokens)
- ```
kano
```
  : Customer satisfaction categorization (~5K tokens)
- ```
weighted
```
  : Multi-criteria weighted scoring (~6K tokens)
- ```
all
```
  : All three methods for comparison (~12K tokens)
```
--output
```
: Output format (default:
```
both
```
)
- ```
yaml
```
  : Structured YAML for downstream processing
- ```
markdown
```
  : Formatted markdown tables
- ```
both
```
  : Both formats
```
--dir
```
: Output directory (default:
```
docs/analysis/
```
)

```
<items-or-context>
```
：待排序的项（内联列表、文件引用或上下文描述）
```
--mode
```
：优先级排序方法（默认：
```
moscow
```
）
- ```
moscow
```
  ：Must/Should/Could/Won't分类（约4K tokens）
- ```
kano
```
  ：客户满意度分类（约5K tokens）
- ```
weighted
```
  ：多标准加权评分（约6K tokens）
- ```
all
```
  ：同时使用三种方法进行对比（约12K tokens）
```
--output
```
：输出格式（默认：
```
both
```
）
- ```
yaml
```
  ：结构化YAML格式，用于下游处理
- ```
markdown
```
  ：格式化的Markdown表格
- ```
both
```
  ：同时输出两种格式
```
--dir
```
：输出目录（默认：
```
docs/analysis/
```
）

Execution Workflow

执行流程

Parse Arguments - Extract items, mode, and output format. If no items provided, ask the user what to prioritize.
Gather Items - Collect from inline list, file reference, or context-based exploration.
Execute Based on Mode:
- MoSCoW: Categorize into Must/Should/Could/Won't with stakeholder input on business criticality, dependencies, compliance, and user impact.
- Kano: Classify by satisfaction impact (Basic, Performance, Delighter, Indifferent, Reverse) considering customer expectations and competitive baseline.
- Weighted: Define criteria with weights, score each item 1-5, calculate weighted scores, and rank.
- All: Run all three methods, compare for consistency, highlight conflicts, and synthesize final priority.
Generate Output - Produce YAML structure, markdown tables (MoSCoW summary, weighted scoring matrix), Mermaid visualizations (quadrantChart, pie chart), and summary report.

Save Results - Save to

docs/analysis/prioritization.yaml

and/or

docs/analysis/prioritization.md

(or custom

--dir

Suggest Follow-Ups - Recommend effort estimation for high-priority items, risk analysis for high-risk items, and capability-mapping for alignment.

解析参数 - 提取待排序项、模式和输出格式。如果未提供待排序项，询问用户需要排序的内容。
收集待排序项 - 从内联列表、文件引用或上下文探索中收集。
按模式执行:
- MoSCoW：结合利益相关者对业务关键性、依赖关系、合规性和用户影响的输入，将项分为Must/Should/Could/Won't四类。
- Kano：结合客户期望和竞争基准，按满意度影响分类（基础型、绩效型、兴奋型、无差异型、反向型）。
- 加权评分：定义带权重的评估标准，为每个项打1-5分，计算加权得分并排序。
- 全部模式：运行所有三种方法，对比结果一致性，突出冲突点，综合得出最终优先级。
生成输出：生成YAML结构、Markdown表格（MoSCoW摘要、加权评分矩阵）、Mermaid可视化（象限图、饼图）和摘要报告。

保存结果：保存至

docs/analysis/prioritization.yaml

和/或

docs/analysis/prioritization.md

（或自定义

--dir

目录）。

建议后续行动：推荐对高优先级项进行投入估算、对高风险项进行风险分析、以及进行能力映射以确保对齐。

Version History

版本历史

v1.0.0 (2025-12-26): Initial release

v1.0.0（2025-12-26）：初始版本