Perfect Project Prioritization In New Product Development: 14 Criteria

Imagine a ship setting sail without a clear destination—its crew would waste time, fuel, and effort drifting aimlessly. That’s what poor project prioritization feels like for many teams.

Too often, they are stuck juggling competing demands or chasing low-impact tasks, leaving innovation dead in the water. Missed deadlines, overrun budgets, and frustrated teams become the norm, holding organizations from reaching their true potential.

But with perfect prioritization, chaos turns into a well-orchestrated symphony. Think of it as building a ladder to success—each prioritized high-impact and avoided low-impact project is a step closer to your desired position. By focusing on projects that align with strategic objectives and customer needs, teams work smarter, not harder. The result?

Faster innovation, stronger collaboration, and a competitive edge that keeps you ahead of the curve. In the following, we present 6 proven frameworks and 14 criteria that help you to perfect project prioritization.

radar-of-project-prioritization-frameworks

What is perfect project prioritization?

Perfect project prioritization is the science - and art - of selecting the right projects at the right time to achieve maximum value and strategic alignment. It is the science and art of managing your development portfolio best.

Systematically prioritizing the right projects is a disciplined approach that balances competing priorities, ensuring that every project contributes to organizational goals and delivers measurable outcomes. Rather than relying on intuition or urgency alone, prioritizing projects effectively uses a structured prioritization process and transparent criteria to assess projects with clear, meaningful criteria.

Factors such as business impact, feasibility, customer value, and resource requirements are carefully weighed to create aclear and actionable roadmap. This process helps project teams focus on what matters most while avoiding distractions and inefficiencies. A well-defined project prioritization process is essential for maintaining productivity and achieving successful project outcomes.

The best project prioritization process also emphasizes proactive planning and flexibility. It involves continuous monitoring and project management to adapt to changing market dynamics, stakeholder expectations, or internal constraints. This ensures that prioritizing projects continuously remains aligned with evolving business objectives.

In essence, perfect project prioritization is about empowering teams to channel their resources into high-impact projects using an effective project prioritization process,driving innovation and fostering sustainable growthwhile maintaining focus and direction.

Benefits of effective project prioritization for product development

Effective project prioritization is the foundation of successful product development, enabling teams to focus on initiatives that deliver the most value. Resources are the most valuable factor in product development. Project management thus needs to find the optimal balance between project value and effort through effective portfolio management. And, finding this balance across multiple projects is what makes project prioritization effective.

Benefits of Effective Project Prioritization

In a competitive landscape, where speed and innovation are paramount, effective project prioritization ensuresresources are allocated to valuable projects that align with strategic goals. Projects are chosen that go beyond short-time priorities and also consider future projects.

A senior project manager plays a crucial role in assessing the business value of different projects, ensuring correct project selection, and crafting a strong project portfolio. When effective, companies accelerate time-to-market and adapt quickly to evolving market demands.

A second key benefit isenhanced resource allocation. A structured project prioritization process with clear project evaluation criteria prevents teams to allocate resources too thin, eliminating wasted effort on low-impact tasks. Instead, resources are channeled into important projects with clear potential for success, ensuring an ongoing process and that every dollar spent drives measurable outcomes.

Another advantage isimproved decision-making clarity. Prioritization frameworks provide structured criteria to project leaders for evaluating projects, reducing ambiguity and bias. Teams can confidently select high-impact potential projects based on data-driven insights, aligning initiatives with customer needs and market opportunities.

Lastly, project prioritization fostersimproved cross-functional collaboration. By creating a shared product developmentroadmap, teams across departments stay aligned and focused on common objectives. This collaboration streamlines workflows and builds commitment among the project managers and contributors, keepingnew product development pipelinesrobust and delivering consistent value to stakeholders.

Common challenges in project prioritization

One of the most significant challenges in prioritizing projects ismanaging conflicting priorities among stakeholders. Product development teams often grapple with competing demands from leadership, marketing, sales, and engineering teams, each pushing for their projects to take precedence.

Without a unified approach, these conflicts can lead to inefficiencies and hinder progress. It is crucial to recognize that not all projects demand immediate attention, and proper project prioritization is vital for effective resource allocation.

Another common pitfall is thelack of clear prioritization criteria. Teams may rely on subjective opinions or personal biases when selecting projects, leading to inconsistent and often suboptimal decisions. For example, prioritizing projects based on familiarity rather than strategic alignment can result in missed opportunities for innovation.

Additionally, team members may be involved in numerous other projects that contribute to their professional growth and overall productivity, highlighting the need for effective task delegation and common project prioritization criteria.

Resource constraintsfurther complicate project prioritization. Limited budgets, personnel, and time mean that teams cannot pursue every promising idea. The inability to effectively balance trade-offs between high-impact and low-resource projects can leave organizations stuck in a cycle of inefficiency.

Finally,changing market dynamicsposes a significant challenge. A project that seems critical today may lose its relevance as customer preferences andindustry trendsevolve. Successful teams address these challenges by employing flexible, data-driven project prioritization strategies that allow them to adapt quickly while staying focused on long-term goals.

Overcoming these challenges requires clear project prioritization criteria, collaboration across teams, and a habitualnew product development process. The following project prioritization frameworks and criteria can ensure that efforts are focused on the right projects at the right time.

6 proven frameworks and 14 criteria to perfect project prioritization

Frameworks provide a structured approach to prioritizing projects. Different frameworks follow different project prioritization methods. Yet, the consistent use of prioritization criteria ensures clarity and objectivity in decision-making. Following any of the project prioritization methods is an essential project management tool for managing project portfolios effectively.

One common project prioritization method is the use of a collective scoring model, which assigns numeric values based on various project prioritization criteria, helping teams evaluate and rank projects collaboratively. Examples of these project prioritization frameworks are RICE scoring, the SCOR framework, or Agile Weighted Shortest Job First (AWSJF).

A second, less complex method for prioritizing projects is the use of a single indicator. For instance, the MoSCoW Method, Eisenhower Matrix, or Kanban Board focus primarily on the availability of resources and assists individual decision-making. In the following, we compare these six project prioritization frameworks.

Each of the frameworks for prioritizing projects includes specific criteria. We collected all 14 criteria for prioritizing projects. Examples of these criteria for prioritizing projects are project importance, project urgency, reach, impact, or effort.

1. RICE-scoring framework

One of the most widely used project prioritization frameworks is theRICE Scoring Framework. The RICE framework is ideal for companies managing a diverse project pipeline or those aiming to implementproject prioritization frameworksthat balance potential impact with feasibility.

RICE characteristics

This system evaluates projects based on four key factors: Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. By assigning scores to these criteria, project managers can prioritize projects with the highest potential project value while considering feasibility and resource investment.

RICE-scoring

It is especially beneficial in software development, product management, and innovation-focused industries where evaluating trade-offs is critical.

By using RICE, organizations can streamline their project prioritization processes, ensuring they focus on initiatives that deliver maximum project value with minimal resource waste.

Reach: Estimates the number of people or entities the project will benefit within a specific timeframe.

Impact: Gauges the expected effect on the target audience or business outcomes, often rated on a scale (e.g., 0.25 for minimal impact to 3 for massive impact).

Confidence: Reflects the certainty of estimates for Reach, Impact, and Effort, typically expressed as a percentage.

Effort: Represents the total time and resources required to complete the project, measured in person-months or similar metrics.

The RICE framework provides a quantitative and objective way to rank initiatives, making it an effective project prioritization method for organizations seeking to maximize their project value.

RICE pros

Data-Driven Decisions: Encourages reliance on quantifiable data for prioritizing projects, reducing biases.

Focus on High-Impact Projects: Ensures resources are allocated to projects that deliver the greatest value.

Customizable Scales: Adapts to different project management needs by allowing customization of criteria scales.

Improved Stakeholder Alignment: Facilitates transparent discussions about project priorities and trade-offs.

RICE cons

Subjectivity in Scoring: Despite its quantitative approach, estimates for Reach, Impact, and Confidence are still subjective judgments.

Resource-Intensive Setup: Requires commitment from subject-matter experts to gather accurate data and establish scoring benchmarks.

Oversimplification Risks: Complex projects with interdependencies may not fit neatly into a single-score framework.

Neglects External Factors: Does not explicitly account for market dynamics or unforeseen challenges that might affect project outcomes.

2. MoSCoW method

TheMoSCoW Methodis a widely adoptedproject prioritization frameworkthat categorizes project tasks or features into four priority levels:Must-Have, Should-Have, Could-Have,andWon't-Have (for now). This qualitativeproject prioritization methodhelps project managers focus on delivering the most critical elements first while balancing resource constraints and timelines.

MoSCoW characteristics

The MoSCoW acronym stands for:

Must-Have: Non-negotiable requirements that are essential for project success. Without these, the project would fail.
Should-Have: Important features or tasks that add significant value but are not absolutely critical.
Could-Have: Nice-to-have elements that enhance the project but can be deprioritized if resources are limited.
Won't-Have (for now): Features or tasks that are out of scope for the current iteration but may be revisited in the future.

This method is particularly popular in Agile and Scrum environments, where iterative development cycles demand flexibility in prioritizing projects and tasks.

The MoSCoW Method is well-suited for projects with tight deadlines, limited resources, or those requiring iterative planning. It is frequently used in project management for software development, product design, and innovation projects to ensure that the team delivers maximum project value within time and budget constraints.

By employing the MoSCoW Method, organizations can streamline their project prioritization processes, ensuring critical deliverables are completed first while maintaining flexibility to adjust priorities as project requirements evolve.

At maximum, 70 per cent of the effort should be spend on the must-haves, 20 per cent on the should-haves, and ten per cent on the could-haves.

MoSCoW pros

Simplicity and Clarity: Easy to understand and implement, making it accessible to teams of varying expertise.

Focus on Essential Deliverables: Ensures critical tasks receive priority, avoiding resource diversion to less impactful features.

Flexibility in Planning: Adapts well to changing project scopes and constraints, aligning with Agile project management principles.

Stakeholder Alignment: Promotes collaboration by creating a shared understanding of priorities among stakeholders.

MoSCoW cons

Potential for Disputes: Subjectivity in categorizing tasks can lead to disagreements among stakeholders.

Overloading "Must-Haves": Teams may incorrectly classify too many items as Must-Have, undermining the framework’s effectiveness.

Limited Quantitative Insight: Lacks the numerical scoring of frameworks like RICE, which may make it less suitable for data-driven prioritization.

Inadequate for Complex Projects: May oversimplify prioritization for large-scale, interdependent projects requiring deeper analysis.

3. Eisenhower matrix

TheEisenhower Matrix, also known as theUrgent-Important Matrix, is a highly effectiveproject prioritization frameworkthat helps individuals and teams categorize tasks based on urgency and importance. Named after former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, this method is a cornerstone of time andproject management, enabling clear distinctions between what requires immediate action, strategic planning, delegation, or elimination.

Eisenhower Matrix characteristics

Eisenhower matrix characteristics

The Eisenhower Matrix divides tasks into four quadrants:

Urgent and Important: Tasks that need immediate attention and have a significant impact. These are top-priority tasks requiring direct action.
Important but Not Urgent: Strategic tasks that are critical for long-term success but can be scheduled for later.
Urgent but Not Important: Tasks that require immediate attention but can be delegated as they do not contribute significantly to long-term goals.
Neither Urgent Nor Important: Low-priority tasks that may be distractions and can often be eliminated.

By categorizing tasks into these quadrants, the Eisenhower Matrix provides a structured approach to prioritizing projects and optimizing time management. The Eisenhower Matrix is ideal for individuals or teams managing daily workloads, task prioritization, or balancing short-term and long-term project goals. It works particularly well for leadership roles, operational planning, and scenarios where clarity on urgency versus importance is crucial.

By adopting the Eisenhower Matrix, organizations and project managers can refine their project prioritization methods, ensuring high-value tasks are addressed effectively while minimizing time spent on low-impact activities. This framework is a powerful tool for driving productivity and enhancing project value through focused effort.

Eisenhower Matrix pros

Eisenhower matrix pros

Simple and Intuitive: Easy to understand and apply across various contexts, making it accessible for teams and individuals.

Improved Focus on High-Value Tasks: Helps direct attention to tasks that align with strategic goals, ensuring optimal use of time and resources.

Supports Delegation: Encourages teams to delegate or eliminate non-essential tasks, reducing workload and inefficiency.

Enhanced Strategic Planning: Promotes scheduling and proactive planning for important but less time-sensitive projects.

Eisenhower Matrix cons

Eisenhower matrix cons

Subjectivity in Categorization: Differentiating between urgency and importance can sometimes lead to inconsistent task classification.

Oversimplification of Complex Projects: May not account for interdependencies or multifaceted tasks in large-scale projects.

Static Nature: Tasks often evolve, and the matrix requires regular updates to remain effective.

Limited Use for Collaborative Work: Best suited for personal time management or individual prioritization rather than team-based projects.

4. Kanban board

TheKanban Boardis a visualproject prioritization frameworkand workflow management tool that helps teams organize, track, and optimize their work processes. Originating from lean manufacturing and widely adopted in Agile and Scrum methodologies, the Kanban Board allows project teams to visualize tasks and their progress across defined stages.

Kanban board characteristics

A Kanban Board typically consists of columns that represent different phases of a project or workflow, such as:

To-Do: Tasks or projects yet to be started.
In Progress: Tasks currently being worked on.
Review: Tasks awaiting approval or verification.
Done: Completed tasks or projects.

Cards representing tasks or projects are moved across these columns as work progresses, providing a clear visual of current priorities, bottlenecks, and completed work.

Kanban Boards are particularly useful in Agile and lean environments, where adaptability and continuous delivery are key. They are well-suited for managing software development, marketing campaigns, and operational workflows. Additionally, they excel in environments requiring transparency and real-time task tracking.

By using Kanban Boards, organizations can streamline their project management processes, enhance team alignment, and foster a culture of accountability. While not a standalone project prioritization method, Kanban Boards complement other frameworks by providing a dynamic, visual representation of work and ensuring that project value is delivered efficiently.

Kanban Board pros

Kanban board pros

Visual Clarity: Provides a real-time, visual overview of tasks, making it easy to track progress and priorities.

Improved Workflow Efficiency: Helps identify bottlenecks and inefficiencies, enabling teams to optimize workflows.

Flexibility: Adapts to various project types and team sizes, making it suitable for diverse industries and projects.

Enhanced Collaboration: Promotes teamwork and transparency by providing a shared view of priorities and progress.

Kanban Board cons

Kanban board cons

Limited Prioritization Guidance: While it visualizes tasks, it does not inherently provide a mechanism for evaluating task value or urgency.

Risk of Overload: Without clear work-in-progress (WIP) limits, teams may take on too many tasks simultaneously, reducing productivity.

Requires Discipline: Teams need to regularly update the board to ensure accuracy and reliability.

May Not Suit Complex Projects: For highly complex projects with interdependencies, a Kanban Board alone may not provide sufficient structure.

5. SCOR framework

TheSCOR Framework(Strategic, Cost, Opportunity, and Risk) is a quantitativeproject prioritization methodthat evaluates project requests based on four key dimensions:Strategic Fit, Cost, Risk,andTime-to-Market. By assigning scores to each category, this framework helps companies effectively rank initiatives based on their potentialproject valueand alignment with organizational goals.

SCOR characteristics

Each dimension in the SCOR Framework is defined as follows:

Strategic Fit: Measures how well the project aligns with the organization’s strategic objectives, long-term goals, and mission.
Cost: Assesses the financial investment required for the project, including both direct and indirect costs.
Opportunity (Time-to-Market): Evaluates the urgency of delivering the project and its potential to capitalize on market opportunities or trends.
Risk: Analyzes the uncertainties, potential obstacles, and likelihood of project failure, considering technical, financial, and operational risks.

Scores for each dimension are typically combined into a weighted total, allowing to compare and prioritize projects in a structured and objective manner.

SCOR pros

SCOR framework pros

Holistic Evaluation: Considers multiple dimensions of a project, providing a well-rounded perspective on its value and feasibility.

Data-Driven Prioritization: Assigns numerical scores to each category, reducing subjectivity in project prioritization.

Strategic Fit: Ensures that prioritized projects contribute to long-term organizational goals.

Adaptability: Can be customized with specific weights and criteria to align with industry or organizational priorities.

SCOR cons

SCOR framework cons

Complexity in Scoring: Requires accurate and consistent data for scoring, which can be challenging to gather.

Resource-Intensive Setup: Initial setup involves developing scoring criteria, assigning weights, and training stakeholders.

May Overlook Qualitative Factors: Focus on numerical scoring might miss nuanced or qualitative aspects of project value.

Potential Bias in Weighting: The framework’s effectiveness depends on appropriately weighted categories, which may introduce bias.

The SCOR Framework is ideal for organizations managing large, diverse portfolios where project prioritization frameworks must balance strategic goals, costs, risks, and market opportunities. It is particularly effective in industries like product development, innovation management, and technology implementation, where assessing multiple factors is crucial.

By leveraging the SCOR Framework, organizations can ensure that their project management processes focus on initiatives with the highest strategic and financial impact while minimizing risks. This approach provides a systematic way to maximize project value and align efforts with broader business objectives.

6. Agile weighted shortest job first (AWSJF)

Agile Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF)is aproject prioritization frameworkwidely used in Agile and Lean environments. This method ranks projects or tasks by dividing their business value by the effort required to complete them, prioritizing those with the highest value-to-effort ratio. It enables teams to deliver the maximumproject valuequickly while optimizing resources and timelines.

AWSJF Characteristics

AWSJF characteristics

The WSJF formula is: WSJF Score=Cost of Delay (CoD)/Job Duration

Cost of Delay (CoD): Represents the economic impact of delaying the task, which may include lost revenue, reduced customer satisfaction, or missed opportunities. CoD is often calculated using three factors:
- User/Business Value: The direct benefit to customers or the organization.
- Time Criticality: How urgent the task is, considering deadlines or market conditions.
- Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement Value: The potential for reducing risk or enabling future opportunities.
Job Duration: The time and effort required to complete the task, often measured in person-days or sprints.

Tasks with the highest WSJF scores are prioritized first, ensuring the most impactful work is tackled early.

weighted-shortest-job-first

WSJF is particularly valuable in Agile and Lean settings, such as software development, product management, and innovation-focused industries. It helps teams make quick, data-driven decisions on which tasks or features to prioritize during sprints or iterations. Additionally, WSJF is effective for balancing competing demands in resource-constrained environments.

By using WSJF, organizations can streamline their project prioritization processes, accelerate value delivery, and ensure that high-impact tasks are completed with minimal delays. This method empowers teams to align with Agile principles while maximizing project value and customer satisfaction.

AWSJF pros

Maximizes Economic Impact: Ensures teams focus on delivering the highest-value work with minimal delay.

Objective Decision-Making: Uses a mathematical approach to reduce bias in project prioritization.

Supports Agile Principles: Aligns with incremental delivery, helping teams achieve quick wins and adapt to changing needs.

Balances Value and Effort: Accounts for both the benefit and feasibility of tasks, promoting efficient resource allocation.

AWSJF cons

Requires Accurate Estimates: Relies on precise calculations of Cost of Delay and Job Duration, which can be challenging to assess.

Overemphasis on Short Tasks: May disproportionately favor smaller tasks with high value-to-effort ratios, potentially sidelining larger strategic initiatives.

Subjectivity in CoD Factors: Estimating user/business value, time criticality, and risk reduction can introduce bias.

Limited to Agile Contexts: Best suited for Agile environments, making it less applicable in traditional project management.

Guidelines to prioritize projects best in new product development

Effectiveproject prioritizationis critical innew product development (NPD)to ensure resources are focused on the most impactful initiatives. The following guidelines can help streamline decision-making and enhanceproject managementoutcomes.

Guideline 1: Project management always on time

Timely execution is a cornerstone of successfulnew product development. Delays can lead to missed market opportunities and reduced competitive advantage. Ensure realistic timelines are set during the planning phase and monitor progress regularly.

Use tools like Roadmaps or Kanban boards to keep tasks and planning on track.

ITONICS Roadmap Software for Strategic Planning

Guideline 2: Strict evaluation, no excuses

Every project must undergo a rigorous and consistent evaluation process. Utilizeproject prioritization frameworkssuch as RICE, MoSCoW, or WSJF to assess potential value, feasibility, and alignment with business goals.

Avoid letting personal preferences, team biases, or unverified assumptions influence decisions. Data-driven analysis and accountability are essential for selecting projects that deliver maximumproject value.

Guideline 3: Strategic alignment beats curiosity

While innovative ideas are vital in NPD, projects must align with overarching strategic objectives to maximize ROI. Evaluate whether a project supports long-term business goals, meets customer needs, and enhances market positioning. Avoid pursuing initiatives solely for their novelty or speculative potential unless they directly contribute to the strategic vision.

Guideline 4: Focus on customer-centricity

Prioritize projects that address explicit customer needs and preferences. Use customer insights, surveys, and market research to validate ideas and ensure product features solve real problems. Keeping customers at the heart of NPD efforts improves product-market fit and drives sustainable growth.

Guideline 5: Balance innovation and feasibility

While ambitious projects can drive breakthroughs, they must be balanced with achievable, short-term goals. Consider an activeproject portfolio managementand a healthy mix of incremental improvements and disruptive innovations to maintain steady progress while exploring new opportunities.

By adhering to these guidelines, organizations can refine theirproject prioritization methods, optimize resource utilization, and enhance the success rate ofnew product developmentinitiatives.

Software supporting project prioritization

The ITONICS Innovation OS is a game-changer for organizations seeking to enhance their project prioritization processes. As a comprehensive innovation management platform, ITONICS provides the tools necessary to centralize, evaluate, and prioritize projects effectively.

From ideation to execution, ITONICS empowers organizations to focus on initiatives that deliver maximum impact, ensuring alignment with strategic goals while optimizing resource utilization.

Centralize project evaluation and insights: Fragmented information and inconsistent evaluations can hinder effective prioritization. With ITONICS, all project data, evaluations, and insights are stored in one central platform. With intuitive dashboards and visualizations, ITONICS links projects to business goals and market needs, ensuring efficient resource use and impactful outcomes.

Adapt to your processes and vocabulary: The ITONICS Innovation OS is easily adaptable to your company's specific needs. Adjust branding, vocabulary, and workflows to your team's needs with our no-code configuration options.

Enable market-oriented prioritization: ITONICS integrates trend and technology radars, allowing users to adapt priority projects to emerging market developments in real time, ensuring proactive responses to opportunities and challenges.