214 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
214 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
# Evidence-Based Requirements Prioritization Task
|
|
|
|
## Purpose
|
|
Ensure all requirement prioritization decisions are backed by concrete evidence, validated data, and measurable impact projections. This task prevents opinion-based prioritization and enforces data-driven product decisions.
|
|
|
|
## Integration with Memory System
|
|
- **What patterns to search for**: Successful prioritization frameworks, feature adoption correlations, MVP scope patterns, value realization timelines
|
|
- **What outcomes to track**: Feature success rates, user adoption metrics, business value achievement, prioritization accuracy
|
|
- **What learnings to capture**: Effective evidence sources, prioritization framework evolution, stakeholder alignment strategies, value measurement approaches
|
|
|
|
## Evidence Categories for Prioritization
|
|
|
|
### User Evidence
|
|
```yaml
|
|
user_evidence:
|
|
quantitative:
|
|
- usage_analytics: Current behavior patterns
|
|
- survey_data: User preference ratings
|
|
- a_b_test_results: Feature validation data
|
|
- support_tickets: Pain point frequency
|
|
|
|
qualitative:
|
|
- user_interviews: Direct feedback themes
|
|
- usability_tests: Observed friction points
|
|
- customer_reviews: Sentiment analysis
|
|
- competitor_analysis: Feature gap identification
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Business Evidence
|
|
- [ ] **Revenue Impact**: Projected revenue increase/cost savings
|
|
- [ ] **Market Size**: TAM/SAM/SOM analysis
|
|
- [ ] **Strategic Alignment**: Company goal correlation
|
|
- [ ] **Competitive Advantage**: Differentiation potential
|
|
- [ ] **Cost-Benefit**: ROI calculations
|
|
|
|
### Technical Evidence
|
|
- [ ] **Feasibility Studies**: Development effort estimates
|
|
- [ ] **Technical Debt**: Impact on existing systems
|
|
- [ ] **Performance Impact**: System load projections
|
|
- [ ] **Security Implications**: Risk assessments
|
|
- [ ] **Maintenance Burden**: Long-term support costs
|
|
|
|
## Prioritization Framework
|
|
|
|
### Step 1: Evidence Collection Matrix
|
|
| Requirement | User Evidence | Business Evidence | Technical Evidence | Evidence Score |
|
|
|-------------|---------------|-------------------|-------------------|----------------|
|
|
| Feature A | Analytics: 80% need | Revenue: $500k/yr | Effort: 3 sprints | 85/100 |
|
|
| Feature B | Interviews: Critical | Market: 50k users | Complexity: High | 72/100 |
|
|
| Feature C | Support: 200 tickets/mo | Strategic: High | Risk: Low | 90/100 |
|
|
|
|
### Step 2: Impact vs Effort Analysis
|
|
```python
|
|
def calculate_priority_score(requirement):
|
|
impact_score = weighted_average({
|
|
'user_value': requirement.user_evidence_score * 0.4,
|
|
'business_value': requirement.business_evidence_score * 0.4,
|
|
'strategic_value': requirement.strategic_alignment * 0.2
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
effort_score = weighted_average({
|
|
'development': requirement.dev_effort * 0.5,
|
|
'maintenance': requirement.maintenance_cost * 0.3,
|
|
'risk': requirement.technical_risk * 0.2
|
|
})
|
|
|
|
return impact_score / effort_score
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 3: Stakeholder Validation
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Stakeholder Evidence Review
|
|
**Requirement**: {requirement_name}
|
|
**Priority Score**: {calculated_score}
|
|
|
|
### Evidence Presented
|
|
- **User Data**: {summary_of_user_evidence}
|
|
- **Business Case**: {summary_of_business_evidence}
|
|
- **Technical Assessment**: {summary_of_technical_evidence}
|
|
|
|
### Stakeholder Feedback
|
|
- **Product**: {agreement_level} - {feedback}
|
|
- **Engineering**: {agreement_level} - {feedback}
|
|
- **Sales**: {agreement_level} - {feedback}
|
|
- **Support**: {agreement_level} - {feedback}
|
|
|
|
### Final Priority**: {adjusted_priority}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Quality Gates
|
|
|
|
### Evidence Collection Gate
|
|
- [ ] Minimum 3 evidence sources per requirement
|
|
- [ ] Quantitative data for top priority items
|
|
- [ ] User validation for all features
|
|
- [ ] Technical feasibility confirmed
|
|
- [ ] Business case documented
|
|
|
|
### Prioritization Gate
|
|
- [ ] All requirements scored objectively
|
|
- [ ] Trade-offs explicitly documented
|
|
- [ ] Dependencies mapped
|
|
- [ ] Resource constraints considered
|
|
- [ ] Timeline impacts assessed
|
|
|
|
### Validation Gate
|
|
- [ ] Stakeholder consensus achieved
|
|
- [ ] Success metrics defined
|
|
- [ ] Monitoring plan established
|
|
- [ ] Go/no-go criteria set
|
|
- [ ] Communication plan ready
|
|
|
|
## Evidence Quality Standards
|
|
|
|
### Acceptable Evidence Types
|
|
```python
|
|
evidence_standards = {
|
|
"quantitative": {
|
|
"minimum_sample_size": 100,
|
|
"statistical_significance": 0.05,
|
|
"data_freshness": "< 3 months"
|
|
},
|
|
"qualitative": {
|
|
"minimum_interviews": 10,
|
|
"persona_coverage": "all primary",
|
|
"documentation": "verbatim quotes"
|
|
},
|
|
"business": {
|
|
"financial_projections": "3 scenarios",
|
|
"market_research": "primary sources",
|
|
"competitive_analysis": "feature parity"
|
|
}
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Success Criteria
|
|
- 100% of priorities backed by evidence
|
|
- Evidence quality score >80%
|
|
- Stakeholder alignment >90%
|
|
- Post-launch validation within 20% of projections
|
|
- Zero "gut feel" decisions
|
|
|
|
## Memory Integration
|
|
```python
|
|
# Prioritization decision memory
|
|
prioritization_memory = {
|
|
"type": "requirements_prioritization",
|
|
"context": {
|
|
"product": product_name,
|
|
"release": target_release,
|
|
"constraints": resource_constraints
|
|
},
|
|
"requirements": {
|
|
"evaluated": total_requirements,
|
|
"prioritized": prioritized_list,
|
|
"deferred": deprioritized_list
|
|
},
|
|
"evidence": {
|
|
"sources": evidence_types_used,
|
|
"quality": evidence_quality_scores,
|
|
"gaps": identified_evidence_gaps
|
|
},
|
|
"outcomes": {
|
|
"accuracy": projection_vs_actual,
|
|
"value_delivered": measured_impact,
|
|
"lessons": key_learnings
|
|
},
|
|
"confidence": overall_confidence
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Output Template
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Evidence-Based Prioritization Report
|
|
**Product**: {product_name}
|
|
**Release**: {release_version}
|
|
**Date**: {timestamp}
|
|
**Confidence**: {percentage}%
|
|
|
|
## Prioritized Requirements
|
|
|
|
### Priority 1: Must Have
|
|
| Requirement | Impact Score | Effort | Evidence Summary | Success Metric |
|
|
|-------------|--------------|---------|-----------------|----------------|
|
|
| {req_name} | {score}/100 | {effort} | {evidence} | {metric} |
|
|
|
|
### Priority 2: Should Have
|
|
{similar_table}
|
|
|
|
### Priority 3: Nice to Have
|
|
{similar_table}
|
|
|
|
## Evidence Summary
|
|
- **User Research**: {participants} users, {methods} methods
|
|
- **Market Analysis**: {market_size}, {growth_rate}
|
|
- **Technical Assessment**: {feasibility_score}%, {risk_level}
|
|
- **Business Case**: {roi}%, {payback_period}
|
|
|
|
## Key Trade-offs
|
|
1. **{Decision}**: Chose {option_a} over {option_b} because {evidence}
|
|
2. **{Decision}**: Deferred {feature} due to {evidence}
|
|
|
|
## Risk Mitigation
|
|
{identified_risks_and_mitigation_strategies}
|
|
|
|
## Success Monitoring Plan
|
|
{how_we_will_validate_prioritization_decisions}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Brotherhood Collaboration
|
|
- Evidence review with research team
|
|
- Technical validation with engineering
|
|
- Business case review with finance
|
|
- Market validation with sales/marketing |