How to use a prioritization matrix to build the right product features

TL;DR: What is a prioritization matrix?

A prioritization matrix is a simple yet powerful tool that helps teams streamline decision-making, align goals, and keep projects on track. It works by ranking tasks based on key factors like urgency, impact, and effort — ensuring that teams stay focused on what truly matters instead of getting bogged down by an endless to-do list. By applying this framework, teams can allocate resources more effectively and consistently deliver high-impact work.

---

Editor’s note: This article was updated on 25 March, 2025, to expand on prioritization frameworks, including Eisenhower, MoSCoW, RICE, and WSJF. We’ve also added images, a comparison table of different prioritization methods, and a downloadable prioritization matrix + worksheet template.

---

Download the prioritization matrix template

---

Why use a prioritization matrix?

Product managers constantly juggle competing priorities, and without a clear framework, it’s easy for teams to invest time and resources in the wrong initiatives. That’s where a prioritization matrix comes in handy. It helps teams:

• Make data-based decisions — Keeps prioritization objective so choices are based on measurable factors like effort, cost, and impact; reduces reliance on gut feelings
• Cater to multiple stakeholders’ requests — Get everyone (leadership, engineering, marketing, sales) on the same page by bringing transparency to the decision-making process
• Maximize efficiency — Ensures high-impact, low-effort tasks take center stage while filtering out distractions and low-value work
• Reduce risk and wasted effort — Prevents teams from building features that don’t contribute any value, which ultimately saves development costs and accelerates time-to-market
• Keep the product roadmap clean and strategic — Prevents roadmaps from getting cluttered with low-priority tasks, making it easier to communicate the plan and maintain momentum
• Optimize time and resource allocation — Ensures teams can work on the right things at the right time, improving overall productivity and meeting deadlines more effectively

With the right framework in place, teams can confidently tackle what matters most, avoiding the trap of endless debates and scattered focus.

The 2×2 prioritization framework

A prioritization matrix is a framework that provides visual insight into which tasks should be completed first. It enables teams to compare and rank tasks or initiatives based on chosen criteria.

The most common type of prioritization matrix is a 2×2 framework where the two axes represent different factors, such as effort and impact or cost and benefit:

Each task or initiative is plotted on the matrix, which helps visualize its relative ranking compared to the others. You can use logic and your team’s bandwidth to figure out the action item for each quadrant:

HIGH IMPACT	LOW IMPACT
Low effort — Quick wins (prioritize these)	Low effort — Fill-in tasks (do these when time allows)
High effort — Strategic investments (worth the effort)	High effort — Time wasters (avoid or eliminate)

Let’s go through examples in the matrix above:

• Top-right quadrant (high effort, high impact) — These tasks require more effort and planning but are worth doing due to their high impact
• Top-left quadrant (high effort, low impact) — These are not worth the effort; avoid them if possible
• Bottom-right quadrant (low effort, high impact) — These are easy wins; prioritize them
• Bottom-left quadrant (low effort, low impact) — These are optional and can be tackled when time allows

Alternative prioritization matrix: Cost vs. benefit

A different approach is to weigh the costs against the benefits. The rules for each quadrant shift accordingly:

HIGH BENEFIT	LOW BENEFIT
Low cost — No-brainer tasks (Prioritize)	Low cost — Optional tasks (Consider)
High cost — Big bets (Evaluate carefully)	High cost — Wasteful tasks (Avoid)

On the graph, this would look like this:

• Top-right quadrant (high cost, high benefit) — Consider these, but don’t commit immediately
• Top-left quadrant (high cost, low benefit) — Scrap these; effort isn’t worth the payoff
• Bottom-right quadrant (low cost, high benefit) — These should be prioritized as they deliver great value at minimal cost
• Bottom-left quadrant (low cost, low benefit) — Consider them, but they are not a high priority

Other popular prioritization frameworks

The 2×2 matrix is a solid go-to, but there are many different prioritization frameworks for PMs to choose from. I’ll talk about them next and compare them in a table:

Eisenhower matrix

This classic “urgent vs. important” framework helps teams separate what needs immediate action from what can wait (or be scrapped altogether). The Eisenhower matrix sorts tasks into four quadrants:

1. Do now — Urgent and important (e.g., fixing a critical bug affecting thousands of users)
2. Schedule — Important but not urgent (e.g., planning a major feature launch for next quarter)
3. Delegate — Urgent but less important (e.g., responding to routine stakeholder updates)
4. Eliminate — Neither urgent nor important (e.g., spending too much time debating minor UI tweaks)

This framework works best when your backlog feels overwhelming and you need to quickly distinguish between “must-do” and “can-wait” tasks. Here’s an Eisenhower matrix template to get you started right away.

MoSCoW method

This one’s a staple when it comes to prioritization frameworks, but it’s often overlooked. It helps teams categorize features and initiatives into:

• Must-have — Essential for product success (e.g., a secure login system for an authentication tool)
• Should-have — Valuable but not urgent (e.g., dark mode for a dashboard—nice to have but won’t break the product)
• Could-have — Low-impact or experimental features (e.g., a small animation update for a button)
• Won’t-have (for now) — Not worth the effort right now (e.g., a complex reporting feature for a new product that still needs traction)

MoSCoW is great when you’re managing expectations with stakeholders because it clearly defines what will — and what won’t — get done in a given timeframe. If competitors are using it, you should, too.

RICE scoring

This one’s perfect for product teams who love numbers. RICE provides a scoring formula based on:

• Reach — How many users will this impact?
• Impact — How significant is the improvement for each user?
• Confidence — How certain are we about our estimates?
• Effort — How much time and resources will this take?

For example, if you’re debating between two new features, one that benefits 10,000 users but takes two months to build and another that helps 1,000 users but can be delivered in a week, RICE gives you a clear score to compare them. This method helps ensure that resources are allocated to the highest-impact initiatives.

WSJF

WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First) is a go-to for Agile teams juggling multiple priorities. It ranks tasks based on:

• Business value — How much impact will this have on customers or the company?
• Time criticality — How urgent is it?
• Risk reduction/opportunity enablement — Will this help eliminate risks or unlock future opportunities?
• Job size — How long will it take to complete?

The goal is to work on the high-value, low-effort tasks first to deliver quick wins while ensuring long-term strategic goals aren’t neglected. For example, if a feature significantly improves user retention and only takes a few days to build, WSJF ensures it jumps to the top of the queue.

Each of these frameworks has its strengths — choosing the right one depends on your product, team structure, and decision-making style. Here, I compare them for you:

Framework	Best for	Key considerations	Example use cases
Eisenhower matrix	Time-sensitive decisions	Balances urgency and importance	A SaaS product manager prioritizes fixing a critical bug over a routine check-in
MoSCoW method	Feature prioritization in Agile	Categorizes tasks into must-have, should-have, could-have, and won’t-have	Used in sprints to prioritize checkout flow over optional UI animations
RICE scoring	Data-driven decision-making	Evaluates based on reach, impact, confidence, and effort	A feature with high reach and low effort is prioritized over one with limited reach and high effort
WSJF (Weighted Shortest Job First)	Balancing business value and urgency	Considers business value, time criticality, risk reduction, and job size	A fintech company prioritizes compliance updates over UI tweaks to meet regulatory deadlines

Prioritization matrix: Downloadable template

When everything feels like a priority, making clear, strategic decisions can be tough. This downloadable 2X2 prioritization matrix and accompanying worksheet are designed to help you evaluate tasks based on effort and impact:

• The Matrix provides a visual breakdown of how tasks fall into four key quadrants, helping you see at a glance what deserves your attention most
• The Worksheet offers a structured format to list, score, and rank your tasks, so you can translate insights into action

Together, these tools will help you identify quick wins, tackle high-impact initiatives, and avoid getting stuck in low-value work. Follow the step-by-step instructions below and start optimizing your workflow today!

How to create a prioritization matrix

Let’s walk through how to create a 2×2 prioritization matrix to measure value vs. effort.

While other factors like cost, time, resources, and stakeholder buy-in can be used, effort vs. value is the most common for product teams, so we’ll use it in this example.

Step-1: Define your matrix criteria

Decide which factors you want to evaluate — effort vs. value is common, but you can also consider cost vs. benefit, risk vs. impact, or other dimensions relevant to your team.

Step-2: Set up your grid

Create a 2×2 matrix with four quadrants:

1. High value, low effort — Quick wins
2. High value, high effort — Strategic investments
3. Low value, high effort — Likely not worth it
4. Low value, low effort — Nice-to-haves, if time allows

Here’s a blank example:

Step-3: Gather and categorize tasks

Use a collaborative whiteboard tool like Miro, FigJam, or Canva Whiteboard. You could start by brainstorming and listing all relevant backlog items, features, or tasks that need evaluation. Write each task on a sticky note, making sure descriptions are clear and specific to avoid confusion.

Have team members individually assess each task based on estimated value and effort, using predefined criteria. Then, facilitate a structured group discussion to place each task on the matrix. Encourage team members to voice their reasoning and work toward a consensus when discrepancies arise.

Adjust placement as necessary to ensure tasks accurately reflect the agreed-upon prioritization.

Step-4: Review and adjust priorities

Engage with stakeholders to review task placement on the matrix. Assess whether current rankings align with overarching business goals and the latest resource availability.

If necessary, make adjustments to ensure the prioritization remains strategically sound and reflects evolving company objectives.

Step-5: Finalize and implement the action plan

Determine the next steps for each quadrant by strategically assigning resources and focus and implementing the action plan.

Start by tackling high-value, low-effort tasks, as these provide immediate impact with minimal investment. These quick wins help build momentum and demonstrate progress.

Next, allocate resources wisely for high-value, high-effort tasks, ensuring that teams have the time, budget, and support needed to execute them successfully.

For low-value, low-effort tasks, consider deprioritizing or scheduling them for later. Low-value, high-effort tasks should be reevaluated or eliminated to avoid unnecessary resource drain.

Step-6: Regularly revisit the matrix

A prioritization matrix is not a one-time exercise. Product managers should revisit it at least monthly to adjust for shifting priorities, stakeholder input, and evolving customer needs:

Example of a prioritization matrix

Imagine a company developing a mobile gaming app. The product team needs to determine which features and tasks to prioritize to ensure an engaging user experience while optimizing development efforts.

The team first evaluates each feature based on two key factors:

• Value — The potential impact on user experience, retention, and business goals
• Effort — The estimated development complexity, time, and resources required

Once the team assigns a value and effort score to each task, they plot them on a 2×2 prioritization matrix. The visual approach allows for a clear understanding of what to tackle first.

Before finalizing priorities, the team engages in a collaborative discussion to validate their assumptions. By re-examining the estimated value and effort of each task, they ensure alignment with user needs, technical feasibility, and business objectives.

Beyond just prioritizing individual tasks, teams can use user story mapping to define the minimum viable product (MVP) experience. This approach helps teams:

• Identify core functionalities needed for the first release
• Map out the customer journey from onboarding to key gameplay interactions
• Plan future releases by structuring features into subsequent development phases

For instance, in the case of a gaming app, the team might categorize potential features under different product capabilities, such as core gameplay mechanics, social interactions, and monetization strategies:

Common mistakes to avoid when using a prioritization matrix

Even with the best intentions, product teams can make critical mistakes that reduce the effectiveness of a prioritization matrix. Here are the most common pitfalls — and how to avoid them:

• Prioritizing tasks based on ease rather than value
  • Teams may focus on quick, low-effort tasks that deliver minimal impact
  • Conversely, they may commit to high-impact initiatives that require unrealistic resources
    • Solution — Evaluate trade-offs between effort and impact rigorously to ensure strategic resource allocation

• Ignoring stakeholder input
  • A prioritization matrix isn’t just for the product team — it should reflect business and user needs
  • Failure to involve key stakeholders (e.g., leadership, engineering, sales, and marketing) can lead to misaligned priorities
    • Solution — Regularly gather cross-functional perspectives when assigning value and effort scores

• Failing to revisit and update priorities
  • Prioritization shouldn’t be a one-time exercise — business goals, market conditions, and user needs evolve
  • Sticking to outdated priorities can lead to missed opportunities or wasted effort on irrelevant tasks
    • Solution — Schedule regular check-ins to adjust the matrix based on new insights and changes

• Overcomplicating the matrix
  • Adding too many criteria can lead to analysis paralysis, making it harder to make decisions
  • Overloading the matrix with excessive data points dilutes its core purpose — simplicity and clarity
    • Solution — Keep the matrix focused on essential prioritization factors and use additional frameworks only if necessary

FAQS

What is a prioritization matrix used for?

A prioritization matrix is a simple way to figure out what to work on first. Instead of guessing, you rank tasks based on stuff like effort, impact, and urgency, so you’re not wasting time on things that don’t matter.

How do you create a prioritization matrix?

1. Decide what matters most (effort vs. impact? urgency vs. importance?)
2. List out your tasks or features — everything you need to prioritize
3. Score them based on your chosen criteria
4. Plot them on a simple grid (e.g., low effort/high impact, high effort/low impact)
5. Use the matrix to make smart decisions — what to do now, what to put off, and what to skip entirely

Which prioritization matrix is best for product managers?

It depends on what you need! Some good ones:

• Eisenhower matrix — Perfect for sorting urgent vs. important tasks
• RICE scoring — Great when you want a data-driven approach (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort)
• MoSCoW method — Helps separate must-haves from nice-to-haves
• Kano model — Focuses on what will actually make users happy

What are common mistakes when using prioritization matrices?

• Choosing the easy stuff over the valuable stuff — Just because it’s quick doesn’t mean it’s worth doing
• Not getting input from the right people — A matrix shouldn’t be made in a vacuum!
• Letting it collect dust — Priorities change, and your matrix should too
• Overcomplicating it — If it feels like a chore, you’re probably doing too much

Conclusion

Prioritizing your product roadmap isn’t about making a perfect list — it’s about making smart trade-offs that push your product forward. Whether you’re improving gameplay, adding social features, or tweaking monetization, a solid framework (like the 2×2 prioritization matrix) keeps things clear and focused.

To make things even easier, I’ve put together a downloadable prioritization matrix + worksheet template that you can use with your team. It’ll help you map out priorities, compare trade-offs, and keep your roadmap on track. Grab your copy and start making prioritization a breeze!