7.6 KiB

Raw Blame History

Feature Decision Workflow (Go/No-Go)

Overview

This workflow provides a structured framework for making major product decisions. It ensures decisions are made deliberately with clear rationale, not reactively or politically.

When to Use This Workflow

Use this for decisions that are:

Significant: More than a few days of work
Strategic: Affects product direction or positioning
Irreversible: Hard to undo once started
Resource-intensive: Requires significant investment

Decision Options

Decision	Meaning	When to Use
GO	Commit resources, proceed	High confidence, strategic fit, acceptable risk
NO-GO	Reject, do not proceed	Poor fit, high risk, better alternatives exist
DEFER	Not now, revisit later	Need more information, timing not right

Workflow Stages

Stage 1: Understand the Initiative

Objective: Ensure complete clarity on what is being proposed.

Questions to answer:

What exactly is being proposed?
- Feature/product description in 2-3 sentences
- What problem does it solve?
- Who requested this? (Customer, team, competitive pressure)
What does success look like?
- How would we know if this succeeded?
- What metrics would change?
What's the scope?
- MVP scope vs. full vision
- Timeline estimate
- Resource requirements

Clarity Check:

Can you explain this to someone unfamiliar in 30 seconds?
Is there ambiguity about what we'd actually build?
Do we have clear acceptance criteria?

Output: Clear initiative description

Stage 2: Strategic Fit Assessment

Objective: Evaluate alignment with vision and current priorities.

Strategic Alignment Scorecard:

Question	Score (1-5)	Notes
Does this align with our vision?
Does this serve our target customer?
Does this strengthen our differentiation?
Does this align with current priorities?
Would this help or hurt focus?

Scoring:

5: Strongly supports
3: Neutral
1: Works against

Priority Conflict Check:

Does this compete with current priorities for resources?
Would this delay existing commitments?
Is this more important than what we're already doing?

Strategic Fit Score: [Sum / 25] = X%

Score	Interpretation
80%+	Strong strategic fit
60-79%	Moderate fit, consider tradeoffs
<60%	Weak fit, needs strong justification

Output: Strategic fit assessment

Stage 3: Impact Analysis

Objective: Assess the potential positive and negative outcomes.

Positive Impact Assessment:

Impact Area	Expected Impact	Confidence	Evidence
Revenue	[High/Med/Low]	[High/Med/Low]	[What evidence?]
User acquisition
User retention
User satisfaction
Competitive position
Technical capability

Negative Impact Assessment:

Risk	Potential Impact	Likelihood	Mitigation
Technical debt
Scope creep
Customer confusion
Team burnout
Opportunity cost

Opportunity Cost:

"What are we NOT doing by doing this?"

[Alternative 1 we won't pursue]
[Alternative 2 we won't pursue]
[Feature/fix that gets delayed]

Output: Impact analysis summary

Stage 4: Risk Assessment

Objective: Identify and evaluate risks.

Risk Categories:

1. Execution Risk

Do we have the skills to build this?
Is the timeline realistic?
Are there technical unknowns?

2. Market Risk

Will customers actually want this?
Is the timing right?
Will competitors respond?

3. Business Risk

Can we afford this investment?
What if it fails?
Are there regulatory concerns?

Risk Matrix:

Risk	Likelihood (1-5)	Impact (1-5)	Score	Mitigation
[Risk 1]
[Risk 2]
[Risk 3]

Risk Tolerance Check:

What's the worst case scenario?
Can we survive the worst case?
Is this a reversible or irreversible decision?

Reversibility Assessment:

Easily reversible: Low-risk, can experiment
Partially reversible: Some sunk cost but can pivot
Irreversible: High commitment, proceed carefully

Output: Risk assessment with mitigations

Stage 5: Make Decision

Objective: Decide: GO, NO-GO, or DEFER.

Decision Framework:

                    Strategic Fit
                    High        Low
                 ┌─────────┬─────────┐
         High    │   GO    │ DEFER/  │
Impact          │         │ NO-GO   │
         Low    │ DEFER   │ NO-GO   │
                 └─────────┴─────────┘

GO Criteria (all must be true):

Strategic fit score ≥ 60%
Expected impact justifies investment
Risks are acceptable and mitigated
Resources are available
Team has capacity and capability
Not conflicting with higher priorities

NO-GO Criteria (any is sufficient):

Poor strategic fit (<50%)
Unacceptable or unmitigatable risks
Better alternatives exist
Insufficient resources or capability
Would derail critical priorities

DEFER Criteria:

Good idea but timing is wrong
Need more information to decide
Waiting on external dependencies
Current priorities must complete first

Stage 6: Document & Communicate

Objective: Record the decision and next steps.

Decision Record:

decision:
  id: "[DECISION-XXX]"
  date: "[Date]"
  initiative: "[Name]"
  decision: "[GO | NO-GO | DEFER]"

  rationale: |
    [2-3 sentences explaining why]    

  # If GO:
  next_steps:
    - "[Action 1]"
    - "[Action 2]"
  owner: "[Name]"
  deadline: "[Date]"
  success_criteria:
    - "[Criterion 1]"
    - "[Criterion 2]"

  # If NO-GO:
  alternatives_considered:
    - "[Alternative 1]"
  revisit_conditions: "[What would change our mind]"

  # If DEFER:
  revisit_date: "[Date]"
  information_needed:
    - "[What we need to know]"

Communication:

Audience	What to Share
Team	Decision + rationale + impact on them
Stakeholders	Decision + high-level rationale
Requestor	Decision + detailed rationale

Events Published

Based on decision:

If GO:

type: decision.go
payload:
  initiative: "[Name]"
  rationale: "[Why]"
  owner: "[Name]"
  deadline: "[Date]"
  success_criteria: [list]

If NO-GO:

type: decision.no-go
payload:
  initiative: "[Name]"
  rationale: "[Why]"
  alternatives_considered: [list]
  revisit_conditions: "[Conditions]"

If DEFER:

type: decision.defer
payload:
  initiative: "[Name]"
  reason: "[Why]"
  revisit_date: "[Date]"
  information_needed: [list]

Downstream Effects

Decision	Other Agents
GO	Compliance reviews, Growth plans measurement, UX plans design
NO-GO	No downstream actions
DEFER	Calendar reminder set for revisit

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

HIPPO Decisions - Don't decide just because the Highest Paid Person's Opinion says so
Analysis Paralysis - Don't defer indefinitely; set a deadline
Sunk Cost Fallacy - Past investment doesn't justify future investment
Scope Creep in Disguise - One feature hiding many
Decision by Committee - One person must own the decision

7.6 KiB Raw Blame History