# Feature prioritization: why gut feeling fails > Feature prioritization without gut feeling: why ranking by the loudest voice, the HiPPO or the biggest client fails, what a feature costs after launch, and how to prioritize with explicit criteria, the critical path, the Kano model and three lenses: desirability, feasibility, viability. - Course: [Outcome-Based Product Roadmaps](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps.md) - Module: Prioritizing with evidence - Lesson 10/15, ~44 min - Source: https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/why-gut-feeling-fails ## Room for less than everyone wants **Alex Tutor:** Back on CatChow's product team, Lucy has done some arithmetic on your roadmap. Today is about feature prioritization: what goes first when everything can't fit. **Lucy:** I added up everything people want in Now and Next. It's about three times what my team can build by June. Something has to give. **Sofia:** Three times. Honestly, my very first instinct is back: sort by who asks loudest and be done with it. **Alex Tutor:** It's tempting: it's fast, and nobody argues. But every slot you give the loudest request is a slot the most useful one doesn't get. **Alex Tutor:** That's **opportunity cost**: the value of the best option you give up by choosing another. With limited capacity, every yes is also a no to something. ![A worker loads one big box into a nearly full blue delivery van and has to leave another valuable box behind on the curb.](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/inline/why-gut-feeling-fails-illustration-2.webp) *The real question: is it better than what it pushes out?* **Sofia:** So the question isn't “is this a good idea?” It's “is it better than what it pushes out?” **Alex Tutor:** Exactly. A useful test: if the quarter suddenly ended halfway, would you be glad about what's already done? Order the work so the answer is yes. > **Exercise:** Lucy's team can take one more item next quarter. The founders want loyalty points; the clinic theme needs an ordering solution that lets clinics restock without phoning. If Sofia picks loyalty points, what is the **opportunity cost**? ## What a feature costs after launch **Lucy:** Also, new things never leave. We still maintain gift cards from three years ago. Twelve people used them last year, and we test them in every release. **Sofia:** Twelve people. And you can't just switch them off? **Alex Tutor:** Someone always complains when you do. That's the **carrying cost** of a feature: what it costs every month after launch, long after the build is paid for. ![A person walks uphill carrying new boxes while dragging a heavy ball and chain shaped like an old gift card.](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/inline/why-gut-feeling-fails-illustration-4.webp) *A cheap launch is never free to keep.* **Sofia:** Testing in every release. What else? **Alex Tutor:** Support answers questions about it, help pages need updating, sales has to explain it, and every new feature must work alongside it. Each one also makes the product a little harder to use. **Alex Tutor:** So a cheap feature is never free. Before saying yes, ask what it will cost to keep, not just to build. **Sofia:** Loyalty points would carry a lot: rules, support questions, accounting for the points. > **Exercise:** Which of these are part of a feature's **carrying cost**? Select all that apply. **Alex Tutor:** Lucy's gift cards point to one more hidden cost: every extra a subscriber can switch on has to work with all the others. Let's count. > **Exercise:** CatChow's box has five extras a subscriber can switch on or off: treats, litter, vitamins, a toy and a dental snack. Brandon asks for a sixth, gift wrap. After that, how many combinations with **at least one extra switched on** must the team be sure work? ## The HiPPO effect and other loud signals **Ian:** Before you rank anything: the founders asked about loyalty points again. And frankly, my gut agrees with them. **Alex Tutor:** That one has a name: **HiPPO**, the highest-paid person's opinion. The HiPPO effect is when that opinion wins by default. It isn't wrong because it's senior. It's risky because rank replaces evidence, and nobody checks it. **Brandon:** Then let me speak for the biggest customer. PurrPoint is our largest client. Shouldn't whatever they want go first? **Alex Tutor:** Their problem matters, and it's already on the roadmap. But ranking by client size turns the roadmap into a custom shop for one buyer. Same for whoever shouts loudest in sales or support. **Sofia:** And “every competitor has one”, from module 1? **Alex Tutor:** Copying is the same trap: you inherit a competitor's priorities instead of choosing yours. And their customers may not be yours. **Sofia:** And Lucy's “something shiny” every quarter? **Alex Tutor:** **Shiny object syndrome**: dropping the plan for whatever new idea excites people this month. Loud, senior, big, copied or shiny: each is a signal worth hearing, never a ranking. ![Four figures pull a small plan in four directions: one with a megaphone, one in an expensive suit, one hugging a giant briefcase, one reaching for a sparkly object.](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/inline/why-gut-feeling-fails-illustration-3.webp) > **Exercise:** Match each way of setting priorities to the trap behind it. ## Kano model example: what customers expect **Sofia:** Is there a way to tell which needs customers care about most? **Alex Tutor:** One lens is the **Kano model**: a way to sort features by how they change customer satisfaction. Some are expected basics, some please people more the better they get, and some delight because nobody asked for them. Each kind earns a slot for a different reason. **Alex Tutor:** Take CatChow. **Expected** things cause anger when missing, and nobody notices when they work: the right food, delivered on the promised day. **Alex Tutor:** **Performance** attributes please in proportion: the more flexible the delivery dates, the happier the owners. **Delighters** surprise people, and nobody misses them when they're absent. **Sofia:** Birthday greetings for cats would be a delighter, then. **Alex Tutor:** Probably. Delight still doesn't earn a slot if it serves no objective. And categories drift: reorder reminders surprised people years ago; now owners expect them. **Sofia:** So yesterday's delighter is tomorrow's minimum. **Alex Tutor:** Yes. And this is the simple version. The full model has more categories, such as features people don't care about either way, and asks customers a pair of questions about each feature. > **Exercise:** Years ago, a delivery-tracking link surprised CatChow's subscribers. Today almost every shop has one. Where does it sit in the **Kano model** now? **Alex Tutor:** One more check on the birthday greetings from a minute ago. > **Exercise:** Birthday greetings for cats would delight subscribers, so in the **Kano model** they deserve a slot on CatChow's roadmap. ## Desirability, feasibility, viability: three lenses **Sofia:** Kano only looks at customers, though. What about cost and money? **Alex Tutor:** Add two more lenses: **desirability, feasibility, viability**. Do customers want it, can we build it, and does it pay off for the business? Strong ideas pass all three. **Alex Tutor:** Try the three lenses on Brandon's portal before you answer. > **Exercise:** The clinic ordering portal: clinics want it, it would serve the clinic channel objective, but it can't work until the warehouse replacement is done. Which lens does it fail **right now**? **Sofia:** The portal: desirable for Brandon's clinics, viable for the channel, not feasible until the warehouse is done. **Alex Tutor:** Nice. A quick 1 to 3 on each lens works for a short list. For forty rows, you'll want your own criteria written down. ## Prioritization criteria from the objectives **Sofia:** If not loudness, then what? I need something I can explain to all three of them. **Alex Tutor:** Explicit **criteria**, agreed before you look at the candidates. They aren't new, either: they come straight from your objectives and key results. **Sofia:** So the first criterion: which key result does it move, and by how much? **Alex Tutor:** Yes. Then: how many customers it reaches, how strong the evidence is, and how much work it takes from everyone, not just engineering. **Sofia:** And deadlines? The conference on 23 May is a fixed date. **Alex Tutor:** Urgency is a fair criterion when a real date is at stake. Write the criteria down, apply them to every request, and the argument moves from who asked to what it does. > **Exercise:** Put the steps of prioritizing with explicit criteria in order. **Sofia:** Then let me write them. Four or five, all from our objectives. **Alex Tutor:** Keep each one answerable with evidence, not taste. Lucy, Brandon and Ian should be able to score the same row and land close to each other. **Alex Tutor:** Test that on two drafts before you write your own. > **Exercise:** Two draft criteria for CatChow's prioritization. Which one can Lucy, Brandon and Ian apply and land close to each other? ## Critical path first, dependencies second **Sofia:** The clinic theme has three candidate solutions, plus the warehouse. Where do I even start? **Alex Tutor:** With the **critical path** from module 3: the steps an admin can't do without. If reordering without a call doesn't work, a nicer order history is pointless. **Sofia:** And the warehouse? Nobody on that path ever sees it. **Alex Tutor:** But the theme depends on it: past two clinics, orders start getting lost. That's a **dependency**. It changes the sequence, so the warehouse comes first in time, but not the priority. **Sofia:** So the clinic theme is the priority, and the warehouse is how we get there. **Alex Tutor:** Right. Judge enabling work by what it unlocks, as with the key results in module 2. Now write your own criteria. > **Exercise:** The clinic theme depends on the warehouse replacement, so the warehouse replacement is a higher priority than the clinic theme. > **Exercise:** Write CatChow's prioritization criteria: 3–5 criteria derived from its two objectives and key results, each with one line on how to judge it. ## When the CEO has a hunch **Ian:** I've read your criteria draft. Fine. But I've run CatChow for years, and my gut says loyalty points. Doesn't that count? **Sofia:** It does count. Just not as the final answer, right? **Alex Tutor:** Right. Experience is often right about the problem. Treat his hunch as a hypothesis: what problem would points solve, and what evidence would show it? **Sofia:** The problem: long-term subscribers who stay only for the price. We have a few comments, no data. **Alex Tutor:** Then promise him a fair hearing: points go through the same criteria as everything else, and you'll tell him what evidence would move them up. Write him that reply. > **Exercise:** Ian says his gut says loyalty points. Write Sofia's reply (2–4 sentences): take his hunch seriously, turn it into something that can be checked and say how loyalty points will be judged. Don't promise a rank, and don't dismiss him. ## Case: Docketly's next quarter **Sofia:** How does your friend's team at the accounting SaaS decide what goes first? **Alex Tutor:** Funny you ask. She sent me the order her director set for next quarter and asked what I'd tell her. Read it with today's eyes. **Sofia:** Let me guess: the director's favorite is at the top. **Alex Tutor:** Look for today's patterns behind each position. Then give her criteria and an order she could defend in front of that director. > **Exercise:** Critique Docketly's priority order for next quarter. ## What to remember **Sofia:** Loud, senior, big, copied or shiny: all signals, none of them a ranking. Criteria come from the objectives, and dependencies only change the order. **Alex Tutor:** And every yes is a no to something else. Written criteria make that visible to everyone. > **Key ideas** > > - **Opportunity cost**: with limited capacity, every yes is a no to something else. Order the work so the most valuable part is done first. > - Ranking by the loudest voice, the **HiPPO**, the biggest customer, a competitor or the latest **shiny object** replaces evidence with volume, rank or fashion. Each is a signal, not a ranking. > - Every feature has a **carrying cost** after launch: support, testing, help pages, sales and extra complexity. > - Set explicit **criteria** from your objectives and key results before looking at candidates: the key result moved, reach, evidence, effort, urgency. Critical-path pains come first; dependencies change the sequence, not the priority. > - The **Kano model** (expected, performance, delighters, drifting over time) and **desirability, feasibility, viability** are lenses that inform criteria, not rankings. **Alex Tutor:** Next time we'll turn your criteria into numbers: value and effort, RICE, and why a precise-looking score can still mislead. - Previous lesson: [Going deeper: features, stages and confidence levels](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/features-stage-confidence.md) - Next lesson: [Scoring frameworks: impact effort matrix, RICE and more](https://productovi.com/courses/outcome-based-roadmaps/scoring-frameworks.md) --- Productovi Learning. Free, no sign-up needed to read.