You're juggling multiple project feature requests. How do you decide which ones take priority?

First of all should evaluate how each feature aligns with the overarching business objectives and strategic goals. Then check and consider the impact on customers, analyze the potential return on investment (ROI), estimate effort and resources and monitor the market to make the best decision.

Juggling multiple projects can be overwhelming if handled poorly. Eliminate this by classifying these tasks based on their level of urgency and importance. One technique that has proven useful in challenging situations as this is the Eisenhower matrix. The matrix is a quadrant — Urgent / Important / Not Urgent / Not Important. For tasks that fall under "Urgent and Important" this should be done immediately. Where you need guide or assistance, seek for it. For tasks under "Not Urgent and Important" — these should be scheduled for later. For tasks under "Not Urgent but Important" — should be delegated under your supervision. Lastly, for task under "Not urgent and Not Important" — should be eliminated or postpone to a further date.

Gut-Sort then Score-Sort. This is how YouTube decides what to serve you next: they rough-sort 500 possible based on crude basic data, then score those top 500 results based on criteria. The same idea can be applied to choosing multiple initiatives: what are the criteria that most matter, such as RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort). RICE is just one model - you may choose to balance MRR long-term vs short-term 30-day cash for example. If that's the case, then gut-sort your top 10, and rate 1-10 the criteria that matters. Last, we have a mantra: 11 of 13 - which just means choose one. At end of the day, there might be 13 ways to get something done, and 11 ways will work, and what we seek is optimizing along risk or effort.

When juggling multiple project feature requests, prioritization is key. Start by evaluating each request based on factors like business value, user impact, alignment with strategic goals, and resource availability. Use frameworks like MoSCoW (Must have, Should have, Could have, Won't have) or RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort) to systematically assess and rank the requests. Consider dependencies, deadlines, and stakeholder input. Regularly review and adjust priorities as project conditions change to ensure that the most valuable and impactful features are developed first. Communication and transparency with stakeholders are crucial throughout the process.

From my experience at Fanera, prioritizing multiple project feature requests is all about aligning with our strategic vision and user needs. We start by evaluating the potential impact of each feature on enhancing user engagement and driving community growth. Feedback from our 500K active users is crucial, as it provides insights into what they value most. We also assess the technical feasibility and resource allocation with our development team to ensure timely and efficient implementation. By considering market trends and competitor analysis, we can stay ahead in the sports-tech landscape. This collaborative and data-driven approach helps us prioritize features that deliver the greatest value

Critical User Needs: Identify features that address the most pressing user issues. Use surveys, user interviews, and support tickets to gather direct insights into what users need the most. Enhancement of User Experience: Prioritize features that significantly improve the overall user experience. Focus on usability, performance enhancements, and intuitive design elements that make your product more enjoyable to use. Business Alignment: Prioritize features that drive user engagement, retention, and revenue growth. Consider features that solve user pain points while also contributing to your business objectives. Ensure that your development efforts are both user-centric and strategically aligned with your business goals.

Agree with Avneesh. Must have "musts" and "wants". Need also discipline within marketing/sales team not to list all features as "musts"! Not always easy, but did lead to some interesting conversations. We typically tied those musts and wants to some metrics, explaining the project cost, project timeline, and product cost impact of each as accurately as we could. Led to "prioritizing" discussions. It was pretty common to hear surprise from our sales/marketing team when they found out a "Must have" would double the cost of the product. These usually changed to "wants" or got dropped, or greatly modified through some productive discussions. Compromise was found!

En este caso, parte del rol del Product Manager es vincular cada solicitud de función (o característica de un servicio) con la visión general y los objetivos establecidos, para así lograr que las características que verdaderamente potencian el valor percibido por los clientes y se alinean con la estrategia, sean consideradas prioritarias. Adicionalmente se facilita la toma objetiva de decisiones centradas en el usuario e incrementando la posibilidad que al final se cumpla con las expectativas del mercado (Market fit).

When I'm deciding which features to prioritize, I prefer to choose that won't cause big problems in the future. because If you keep taking shortcuts now, you'll have to pay back a lot more effort later to fix things later. So, it's better to choose features that don't create big problems down the road or even help clean up existing issues!

At Finseal, clean code is our priority to minimize technical debt (think: duct-taped house!). We leverage Agile for continuous improvement & a scalable platform that adapts to market trends. This ensures long-term stability & happy clients! Here's how we manage technical debt at Finseal: Clean & Scalable: Prioritize features that integrate smoothly, reducing technical debt for a robust, future-proof platform. Innovation First: Long-term vision guides decisions. Avoid short-cuts that hinder future development. Code Health: Regular reviews & refactoring keep our codebase clean and maintainable.

Creo que esta fuertemente vinculado con el punto 1 de prioridades. El tiempo y la energia son bienes escasos, y su mala combinacion puede ser letal. Es obligacion de los líderes de los equipos encontrar balances para que se puedan ir agregando vectores sin afectar el rendimiento global, y sin alejarnos de las prioridades especificas del negocio.

At Finseal, we believe in a continuous feedback symphony. Every weekday, a dedicated team engages with clients, gathering their insights. Then, on alternate Saturdays, we come together to analyze this "feedback concert," identifying both applause (areas we excelled) and off-key notes (areas for improvement). This constant dialogue ensures we understand user needs and course-correct where necessary. Just like an orchestra refines its performance based on audience feedback, Finseal's feedback symphony helps us build a platform that resonates with our clients.