Moscow analysis

‍

The MoSCoW method is a widely used framework for sorting items by criticality. The acronym stands for:

• Must have
• Should have
• Could have
• Won’t have this time

After compiling a list of initiatives, the team sorts them into these four categories based on agreed criteria:

Must have

• Absolutely essential.
• The solution is not viable, legal, or functional without it.
• Ask: What happens if this isn’t delivered? If the answer is “cancel the project,” then it’s a Must.

Should have

• Important but not vital.
• May require workarounds (e.g. manual effort or communication).
• The solution can function without it, but it’s less effective.

Could have

• Desirable but non-essential.
• Easy to drop if time or budget runs short.
• Minimal negative impact if omitted.

Won’t have this time

• Explicitly out of scope for this delivery cycle.
• Helps clarify boundaries and prevent scope creep.
• Essential for expectation management and stakeholder alignment.

Clearly stating what won’t be included can be as valuable as deciding what will be. This category is often underused, yet extremely powerful.

Learn more here.

‍

Priority Poker

‍

Priority Poker is a gamified technique for quickly assessing and aligning task priority — similar in format to Planning Poker, which is used to estimate effort in agile teams.

First, the facilitator gathers all relevant team members and prepares a list of backlog items or tasks to be prioritized. Each person receives a set of cards representing priority levels. A common scale includes five levels:

• Very High
• High
• Medium
• Low
• Very Low

The facilitator reads out one item at a time. Each participant selects the card that reflects their opinion on the task’s importance and places it face down. When all have made their choice, the cards are revealed simultaneously.

If there are large differences in ratings, the team discusses the reasoning — especially between the highest and lowest scorers. After the discussion, a second voting round may be held. The goal is not total agreement, but shared understanding and informed consensus.

This technique fosters alignment and helps uncover differing assumptions within the team.

Learn more here.

‍

Simple methods to prioritize with confidence

‍

These are just a few techniques that have repeatedly proven helpful in tough prioritization sessions. They’re easy to implement, highly adaptable, and particularly useful when a team is dealing with competing interests or limited resources.

Hope this overview is helpful. Feel free to share your own tips, tools, or feedback in the comments — always looking for better ways to prioritize smarter and work more effectively as a team.

Sources: Moscow Prioritisation Framework, Managing software requirements, Agile estimating and planning, Quality improvement.