Now Reading: Avoiding Common Prioritization Pitfalls
-
01
Avoiding Common Prioritization Pitfalls
Avoiding Common Prioritization Pitfalls
Prioritization is a critical skill in project management, but it’s also a common source of frustration and project failure. While a framework like MoSCoW provides a clear structure, the real challenge lies in its application. By being aware of these common pitfalls, you can navigate your projects with greater clarity and ensure your team stays focused on what truly matters.
Pitfall #1: The "Everything is a Must Have" Trap
One of the most frequent mistakes teams make is assigning too many features to the “Must Have” category. This can happen due to a fear of not delivering enough value or pressure from multiple stakeholders. When everything is urgent, nothing is, and your team’s focus becomes diluted, leading to burnout and missed deadlines.
How to avoid it: Be ruthless with your “Must Have” criteria. A feature is only a “Must Have” if the product cannot be launched or a specific legal/regulatory requirement isn’t met without it. Encourage a culture of challenging assumptions and being selective. If a feature can be released in a later phase, it’s not a “Must Have.”
Pitfall #2: The Lack of Stakeholder Alignment
Prioritization often fails when key stakeholders don’t agree on the criteria or the final list. A project manager might create a perfect MoSCoW list, but if a key stakeholder disagrees with a crucial decision, the entire plan can be derailed.
How to avoid it: Involve key stakeholders from the very beginning. Schedule a dedicated prioritization meeting where everyone can voice their opinions and agree on the criteria for each category. Don’t just present the final list; facilitate a conversation that leads to a shared understanding and buy-in. This collaborative approach ensures that everyone is on the same page.
Pitfall #3: Forgetting About the "Won't Have" List
The “Won’t Have” category is often seen as a throwaway list of rejected ideas. However, it’s one of the most powerful communication tools in the framework. When a feature is explicitly listed as a “Won’t Have,” it communicates to the team and stakeholders that it is out of scope for the current phase, preventing future conversations and scope creep.
Pitfall #4: Prioritizing for Today, Not Tomorrow
It’s easy to focus on short-term gains and neglect the long-term vision. Teams may prioritize an easy-to-build feature today that offers minimal value, instead of tackling a more complex but strategically important “Should Have” that will pay off in the future. This short-sightedness can lead to technical debt and a product that lacks a clear direction.
How to avoid it: Always refer back to your high-level strategy and product goals. A great way to do this is to tie each feature’s description to a specific strategic objective. Regularly review your priorities to ensure they still align with the evolving market and your long-term vision.
Pitfall #5: Ignoring Dependencies and Risks
A feature may be a “Must Have,” but if it’s dependent on a high-risk technical component, its prioritization might need to be re-evaluated. Teams can fall into the trap of prioritizing based solely on perceived value without considering the technical effort, dependencies on other teams, or potential risks.
How to avoid it: Integrate technical teams and project leads into the prioritization process. During your sessions, make sure to add a field for “Dependencies” or “Risks” next to each feature. If a “Must Have” has a high dependency on a resource you don’t control, it might be more realistic to re-categorize it as a “Should Have” until the risk is mitigated.
By being mindful of these common pitfalls and actively implementing strategies to avoid them, you can ensure that your prioritization process is not just a one-time exercise but a dynamic and effective tool for project success.