LEARN. PRACTICE. GROW.Concept and mechanism
Ordering work requires choices. Always dividing capacity equally among stakeholders may seem fair, but does not establish greater contribution to the goal. Explain expected value, dependencies, constraints, and decision rationale while remaining open to new information. The Product Owner can say a request will not be handled now without preventing future collaboration. Size also does not determine priority alone. A small item may unlock important learning, but not every small item should come first. Compare contribution and cost in context. Do not turn a prioritization technique into a formula replacing judgment and product accountability.
Guided application
A mandatory acceptance condition and fixed window require an explicit capacity discussion. Adding an extra does not increase available capacity. Preserve the necessary commitment and negotiate alternatives, phasing, or resources through appropriate authorities. Include technical work affecting quality and future capability: recurring regressions may consume time needed to respond to users. That investment needs purpose and evidence, just like a feature. When new information reduces the value of nearly finished work, compare remaining costs and achievable benefits. The 80% already developed is context, but not sufficient reason to spend the final 20% if a better alternative exists.
An improvement reducing rework can create value through future capacity even without adding a visible button.
Common pitfalls
Pressure as priority; sunk cost as justification; technical work as valueless; promises without capacity.
Related topics: Forecasts, flow, and release choices · EBM and measurement interpretation
Order with explicit reasons and revisit decisions when evidence changes.
Reference: Introduction to the Product Backlog · PSPO II; Scrum Guide November 2020 and EBM Guide May 2024; no public numbered exam revision