skills / business

prioritization-frameworks

what it does

Reference guide to 9 prioritization frameworks with formulas, when-to-use guidance, and templates — RICE, ICE, Kano, MoSCoW, Opportunity Score, and more. Use when selecting a prioritization method, comparing frameworks like RICE vs ICE, or learning how different prioritization approaches work.

Verified Before and after: 2 models 1 try per case View source Download .zip

Compare the answers

Answers from Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol · try 1 of 1

Same request, same model, once with the skill and once without. Read both and judge for yourself.

“Which of these customer problems should we work on first? We surveyed 200 customers; ratings are averages on a 1-10 scale.”

Source material given with the request

Problem Importance Satisfaction with today's solution Finding past invoices 8.9 8.6 Reconciling bank feeds 9.2 3.4 Sending payment reminders 7.0 3.0 Exporting data for accountant 7.5 5.0 Custom invoice themes 3.1 2.0 Note from sales: 14 customers have asked for custom invoice themes.
with the skill
**Work on reconciling bank feeds first.** It has the highest importance and very low satisfaction—the largest unmet customer need. Use **Opportunity Score = Importance × (1 − Satisfaction)**, normalizing your 1–10 ratings to 0–1 with `(rating − 1) / 9`. | Priority | Customer problem | Importance | Satisfaction | Opportunity score | |---|---|---:|---:|---:| | **1** | **Reconciling bank feeds** | **9.2** | **3.4** | **0.668** | | 2 | Sending payment reminders | 7.0 | 3.0 | 0.519 | | 3 | Exporting data for accountant | 7.5 | 5.0 | 0.401 | | 4 | Custom invoice themes | 3.1 | 2.0 | 0.207 | | 5 | Finding past invoices | 8.9 | 8.6 | 0.137 | ### How to interpret this - **Bank reconciliation:** Customers care deeply, and current solutions fall short. Start discovery here. - **Payment reminders:** The next strongest opportunity. - **Finding invoices:** Important, but already well served. Maintain quality rather than prioritize improvements. - **Custom themes:** Low satisfaction alone doesn’t make something a priority; importance is also low. **The 14 theme requests are a research lead, not a reason to override the ranking.** Ask those customers what underlying problem they’re trying to solve—for example, brand credibility or meeting client requirements—and check whether it is especially important to a strategically valuable segment.
Show the rest (1 more line)
**Next step:** Interview customers about failed or frustrating bank-reconciliation workflows. Then compare potential solutions using RICE or ICE, incorporating reach, confidence, and implementation effort. This survey ranks the **problems**; it doesn’t yet establish which solution to build.
without
**Work on reconciling bank feeds first.** It has the highest importance score (9.2/10) and low satisfaction with today’s solution (3.4/10)—the clearest combination of a critical need and an underserved problem. A useful first-pass ranking is the **importance–satisfaction gap**: | Priority | Problem | Importance | Satisfaction | Gap | |---|---|---:|---:|---:| | 1 | Reconciling bank feeds | 9.2 | 3.4 | **5.8** | | 2 | Sending payment reminders | 7.0 | 3.0 | **4.0** | | 3 | Exporting data for accountant | 7.5 | 5.0 | **2.5** | | 4 | Custom invoice themes | 3.1 | 2.0 | **1.1** | | 5 | Finding past invoices | 8.9 | 8.6 | **0.3** | **How to interpret this:** - **Bank reconciliation:** strongest opportunity; investigate specific failure points and scope a solution. - **Payment reminders:** promising next candidate. - **Finding invoices:** important, but already well served—maintain quality rather than prioritize major improvements. - **Custom themes:** the 14 requests are worth understanding, but request volume alone shouldn’t override low average importance. Check whether those customers represent a strategically important segment or meaningful revenue at risk. **Before committing engineering capacity:** validate the main reconciliation pain points and estimate effort. These averages identify the strongest customer need, not necessarily the highest-return implementation; a very costly reconciliation fix could justify shipping a small reminder improvement first.

Answers are shown exactly as the model wrote them, from the first try, and nothing is picked by hand.

The models

2 models

Claude Sonnet 5.5

made by Anthropic

claude-sonnet-5-5 · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 3 Nov 2026

GPT-6.1 Sol

made by OpenAI

gpt-6.1-sol · revision not reported by the provider

1 try per case · tested 3 Nov 2026

The tasks

written by Carte Blanche
request-count-list

“Sales gave me the most requested features with counts. Can I just build them in order of request count?”

score-with-mixed-units

“Rank these by our usual score: reach × impact × confidence ÷ effort. Show the scores.”

startup-method-choice

“We're a 4-person startup with about 30 feature ideas in a spreadsheet and a planning meeting on Friday. We have almost no usage data. What's a sensible way to prioritize?”

survey-ranking

“Which of these customer problems should we work on first? We surveyed 200 customers; ratings are averages on a 1-10 scale.”

weighted-matrix

“Leadership has to pick one of these three initiatives. Which should we pick? Show the math.”

Install

Download the .zip and unzip it. Put its files, in a folder named prioritization-frameworks, here:

Claude Code~/.claude/skills/Every project. For one project only, use .claude/skills/ inside it.
Codex~/.agents/skills/Every project. For one repository only, use .agents/skills/ inside it.
Cursor~/.cursor/skills/Cursor also reads the Claude Code and Codex folders above.

Then start a new session and ask for what the skill does. Other agents that read SKILL.md have their own skills folder; check their docs.

Coming after launch: get skills from inside your agent, no download needed.