Did you know that 88% of working people procrastinate on a daily basis? A lengthy to-do list can lead to overwhelm, but with multiple tasks vying for our attention, how do we choose which ones to tackle first?
Dive in to discover tried-and-true techniques that can help transform your project planning process, boost productivity and ensure success, one prioritized task at a time!
Let’s get started!
Table of contents
- A complete overview of techniques for effective time management
- The RICE scoring model
- The ABCDE method
- The MoSCoW method
- The Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) model
- The Eisenhower Matrix
- The Lean Prioritization (Value vs. Effort) Matrix
- The Kano Model (Three Bucket Features)
- The Weighted Scoring Model
- The Walking Skeleton technique
- The K-J (affinity diagram) methodology
- The story mapping method
- The product tree method
- The ultimate prioritization showdown: which method will prevail?
- Prioritization tools: how to pick the right one for your needs
- FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
A complete overview of techniques for effective time management
Today, effective time management is more critical than ever. Over 88% of working people procrastinate daily.
Whether you’re working in tech or another industry, staying on top of your workload and achieving your goals requires a solid understanding of how to manage your time efficiently.
That’s where prioritization comes in.
From simple methods like the ABCDE one to more sophisticated techniques like the WSJF model, there are various approaches to prioritizing your tasks and optimizing your workflow.
Let’s take a look at each of them.
The RICE scoring model
For example, a company may prioritize a list of possible product features using RICE.
By ranking each feature according to RICE, the company can identify which features will likely have the most significant impact on customers and which are feasible to implement within a given timeframe and budget.
Here’s a brief overview of each of the four criteria:
- Reach: estimate how many people will be impacted by the task within a defined period. For example, 150 new customers or 300 sign-ups in the next quarter.
- Impact: assess how much the task will impact each person using a rating scale. To estimate impact, Intercom created a five-tiered scoring system with values of 3 for “massive impact”, 2 for “high”, 1 for “medium”, 0.5 for “low”, and 0.25 for “minimal”.
- Confidence: rate your confidence in the estimates using a scale from 1% to 100%. Your options can be High = 100%, Medium = 80%, and Low = 50%. If your confidence score is below 50%, consider prioritizing another project.
- Effort: estimate the total resources needed to complete the initiative over a given period, in “person-months”. For instance, if you estimate a project will take three person-months, your effort score will be 3. Anything less than a month is scored as 0.5.
The resulting score is calculated on the following formula:
To prioritize features in PPM Express using the RICE method, consider the following example.
Let’s say we have three features to prioritize.
To calculate the RICE score for the first feature, let’s define the RICE elements as follows:
- Reach: around 300 monthly customers can use the feature.
- Impact: assigned an impact score of 1, because it may not be highly important to users.
- Confidence: estimated at 50% (0.5) due to low confidence.
- Effort: implementation will take approximately three months, giving it an effort score of three.
By multiplying reach, impact, and confidence and dividing by effort, we get a RICE score of 450. Repeat this process for the other features.
After calculating RICE scores for each feature, you should create a comparison table to rank the projects and determine which ones should be prioritized first.
The table includes columns for the project name, RICE score, and additional information such as budget, resources, and timeline.
While the RICE scoring model helps prioritize projects and products based on reach, impact, confidence, and effort, it’s not the only option available.
Another popular prioritization tool is the ICE scoring model.
Let’s take a closer look at it.
How is the ICE scoring model different from RICE?
ICE can be considered a simpler version of RICE as it focuses on only three factors: impact, confidence, and ease of implementation (efforts).
This method can be used in deciding which features to add to a product, which marketing campaigns to launch, or which bugs to fix first, whereas RICE is a more comprehensive and nuanced approach that considers a task’s potential reach.
The resulting ICE score is calculated using the following formula:
Other prioritization techniques may be better suited to situations where you need to prioritize through time indicators.
One such technique is the ABCDE method, which focuses on categorizing tasks based on their level of importance and urgency.
The ABCDE method
The ABCDE method is a simple yet effective prioritization technique that anyone can use to manage tasks and projects more efficiently.
Brian Tracy, the leadership and success psychology coach, invented it. It involves ranking tasks based on their priority and urgency.
Here’s a brief overview of each of the five categories in the ABCDE method:
- A – high-priority and urgent tasks with significant consequences
- B – important tasks but less urgent than A, with moderate consequences
- C – low-priority tasks with few to no consequences
- D – tasks that can be delegated to others
- E – tasks that can be eliminated or removed from the to-do list
The ABCDE prioritization method may have limitations due to its reliance on subjective opinions and potential lack of consideration of factors such as feasibility, resources, and strategic alignment with company goals.
It is recommended that you use this method along with other techniques and regularly re-evaluate priorities based on changing circumstances.
Let’s look at how another approach can be used for effective prioritization.
The MoSCoW method
The MoSCoW prioritization method is a widely used technique in project management, software development, and business analysis to help teams prioritize their work based on the importance and urgency of each task or requirement.
For instance, MoSCoW helps you prioritize critical activities such as email campaigns and social media ads in marketing campaigns. In product development, MoSCoW can prioritize user stories and requirements based on their importance to the overall user experience.
The acronym MoSCoW stands for:
- Must have (M): critical project requirements that must be completed within the given timeframe, as the project cannot be delivered without them.
- Should have (S): important requirements that can be postponed or deprioritized if time or resources are limited.
- Could have (C): desirable but not essential requirements that provide added value or enhance the end product.
- Won’t have (W): lowest priority items that will not be addressed in the current project or iteration.
While the MoSCoW method is a helpful tool for prioritizing requirements based on their importance and necessity, it may not take into account other important factors, such as cost and time-to-market.
Another prioritization technique that addresses these factors is the Weighted Shortest Job First model.
Let’s look at how it can be used for effective prioritization.
The Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) model
The Weighted Shortest Job First model is a prioritization technique used in Agile and Lean software development to help teams prioritize work based on the value it delivers and the time it takes to complete.
WSJF considers Business Value, Time Criticality, Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement, and Job Size.
Here’s a brief overview of each of them:
- User-Business Value: measures the value of the work item to the business.
- Time Criticality: measures the urgency of the work item.
- Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement: measures the work item’s potential risk reduction or opportunity enablement.
- Job Size: measures the size of the work item against other work items. Smaller work items should be prioritized over larger ones.
The WSJF formula is:
The Cost of Delay represents the impact of delaying the feature or task. The CoD is then calculated as the sum of the products of each factor value:
To use the Weighted Shortest Job First method, you should:
- Estimate the cost of delay parameters in columns 1, 2, and 3, setting the smallest item to 1.
- Ensure each column has a 1 representing the smallest item to normalize the parameters against each other. Next, add up each component to calculate the Cost of Delay in column 5.
- Estimate the job size in column 6, giving the smallest job a 1.
- Finally, calculate the WSJF by dividing the Cost of Delay by the Job Size.
While the WSJF model is a valuable tool for prioritizing tasks based on their value, time-to-market, and risk reduction, it may not take into account other key factors, such as urgency, financial instability, and importance.
Another popular prioritization tool that addresses these factors is the Eisenhower Matrix.
Let’s take a closer look at it.
The Eisenhower Matrix
The Eisenhower Matrix, also known as the “Urgent-Important” Matrix, is a popular time management tool that helps individuals prioritize tasks based on urgency and importance.
The 34th U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower created this method, and it has been widely adopted in both personal and professional settings.
The matrix consists of four quadrants, each representing a different level of urgency and importance:
- “Important” and “Urgent”: these tasks require immediate attention and action.
- “Important” but “Not Urgent”: these tasks can be scheduled and completed later.
- “Not Important” but “Urgent”: these tasks can be delegated to someone else.
- “Not Important” and “Not Urgent”: these tasks can be eliminated or done later.
While the Eisenhower matrix is a helpful tool for prioritizing tasks based on urgency and importance, it may not take into account other important factors such as value and complexity.
Another prioritization technique that addresses these factors is the Lean Prioritization Matrix.
Let’s take a closer look at it.
The Lean Prioritization (Value vs. Effort) Matrix
The Lean Prioritization Matrix is a tool used by Agile teams to prioritize features and projects based on their impact and the effort required.
It consists of a 2×2 matrix, with “Impact” (“Value”) on the x-axis and “Effort” (“Complexity”) on the y-axis.
By categorizing features and projects into these quadrants, Agile teams can focus on the most impactful and valuable features while avoiding wasting resources on low-impact or unnecessary features.
The matrix is divided into four quadrants, each representing a different combination of high or low impact and high or low effort:
- High Impact, Low Effort (Quick Wins): these projects should be prioritized.
- High Impact, High Effort (Big Bets): these projects should be considered carefully and scheduled appropriately.
- Low Impact, Low Effort (Maybes): these projects can be considered for implementation if time and resources permit.
- Low Impact, High Effort (Time-sinks): these projects should be avoided or deferred, as they are unlikely to provide a significant return on investment.
You might think that Lean Prioritization resembles the Eisenhower matrix. It’s somewhat true.
Both methods aim to improve productivity and decision-making by focusing on the most important tasks or initiatives, but they differ in their approach to prioritization.
The Eisenhower Matrix prioritizes tasks based on urgency and importance, while the Lean Prioritization Matrix prioritizes initiatives based on value and effort.
While the Value vs. Effort matrix is a helpful tool for prioritizing tasks based on their value and complexity, it may not consider the level of customer satisfaction associated with each task.
Another popular prioritization tool that addresses this factor is the Kano Model.
Let’s take a closer look.
The Kano Model (Three Bucket Features)
The Kano Model (also known as “Three Bucket Features”) is a customer satisfaction framework used to prioritize features or attributes of a product or service based on their impact on customer satisfaction.
The model was developed by Japanese academic Professor Noriaki Kano in the 1980s, and it has been widely adopted by businesses worldwide since.
The Kano Model categorizes product or service features into three categories:
- Must-haves: basic features that customers expect as a minimum requirement. If these features are present, customers will be satisfied.
- Performance Features: attributes that improve customer satisfaction linearly. The more there are of these current features, the more satisfied customers will be.
- Delighters: unexpected features that exceed customer expectations and create a positive emotional response, significantly increasing customer satisfaction and loyalty.
After using the Kano Model to identify and prioritize features based on customer needs and preferences, companies can use the Weighted Scoring Model to assign weights to different criteria and score each initiative based on those weights.
This allows companies to objectively evaluate and compare initiatives based on multiple factors, including cost, time, resources, and impact on customer satisfaction.
Let’s discover how companies can do this with the Weighted Scoring Model.
The Weighted Scoring Model
The Weighted Scoring Model is a prioritization technique used to evaluate and rank options based on multiple criteria. This model was first introduced by Stanley Zionts in 1979 as a part of the Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) mathematical model.
Here’s a brief overview of the steps involved in the Weighted Scoring Model:
- Identify criteria: these should be relevant to the decision and measurable or observable.
- Assign weights: assign weights to each criterion based on their relative importance. The sum of all the weights should equal 100%.
- Score options: calculate scores based on how well it meets each criterion. Scores can be assigned using a numerical scale or a qualitative rating system.
- Calculate weighted scores: multiply scores by the weight assigned to that criterion. The weighted scores are added together to provide an overall score for each option.
- Evaluate options: evaluate and rank the options based on their scores. The option with the highest score is considered the best choice.
For example, we have three features that we want to prioritize. We have assigned a score for each initiative based on five criteria, with weight given to each of them.
According to our example, we should start with Features #2 and #3, which have the highest WSM index.
The Weighted Scoring Model is a flexible and adaptable technique. A project manager may use the Weighted Scoring Model to assess different features of a software project and assign weights based on criteria such as customer impact, resource requirements, and project timeline.
While the Weighted Scoring Model is a valuable tool for prioritizing tasks based on multiple factors, it may not provide a clear picture of how the final product will look or function.
Another prioritization technique that addresses this is the Walking Skeleton technique.
Let’s look closer at the Walking Skeleton technique and how project managers can use it for effective prioritization.
The Walking Skeleton technique
The Walking Skeleton technique is an Agile software development technique that focuses on creating a simple, functioning version of a product or application as quickly as possible.
The goal of the technique is to define a basic framework or “skeleton” of the product and then build out additional features and functionality as needed.
Here’s a brief overview of the steps involved in the Walking Skeleton technique:
- Identify the core functionality: choose features essential to the success of the product or application.
- Build a basic version: include core functionality only.
- Test and iterate: ensure that it meets user needs. Project managers use feedback to iterate and improve the product or application over time.
- Add features and functionality: add additional features and functionality based on user feedback and market needs.
You may say that Walking Skeleton seems similar to MVP, and that’s somewhat true.
Both “Walking Skeleton” and “MVP” are approaches used in software development and project management to release a basic, functional version of a product as quickly as possible.
However, they have different objectives and scopes.
Let’s compare the two:
|Minimum Viable Product (MVP)
|Validate technical feasibility
|Validate product-market fit
|Core functionality and architecture
|A minimum set of features for end users
|Agile software development (e.g., XP)
|Lean startup methodology
|Prove underlying technical structure
|Provide value to end-users and gather feedback
|May not include a user interface
|Contains user interface
|Value for End-Users
|Limited or none
|Addresses primary pain points or needs
|Identify technical issues
|Refine the product and decide on the next features
Both approaches emphasize incremental development and early validation but serve different purposes in the project lifecycle.
While the Walking Skeleton technique is a helpful tool for prioritizing tasks based on creating a basic functioning product, it may not consider other important factors such as customer value or resource constraints.
Another prioritization technique that can help with this is the KJ methodology.
Let’s take a closer look at it.
The K-J (affinity diagram) methodology
The K-J methodology is a group brainstorming and decision-making technique developed by the Japanese ethnographer Jiro Kawakita. It is designed to help teams generate and organize ideas in a structured and collaborative manner.
The K-J methodology involves the following steps:
- Generate ideas: do it through a group brainstorming session or by collecting ideas from individual team members.
- Categorize ideas: group ideas under similar categories or themes.
- Name the categories: choose a name representing the common theme of the ideas within it.
- Vote on categories: use a fixed number of votes to distribute ideas among the categories.
- Prioritize ideas: select the individual ideas within each category based on their importance or relevance to the problem or topic.
Project managers can use the affinity diagram methodology in the following situations:
- Brainstorming: helps generate ideas and then group similar ideas together to create clusters of related concepts.
- Problem-solving: assist in breaking down a problem into smaller pieces and analyzing each piece in detail.
- Requirements gathering: helps gather requirements from stakeholders for a project or product. It allows stakeholders to provide input on what they think is important and helps identify key themes and priorities.
- Design thinking: helps organize and synthesize ideas and insights from user research and observation.
- Process improvement: assist in improving existing processes by breaking them down into smaller components and analyzing each element to identify areas for improvement.
While the K-J methodology is helpful for grouping and categorizing tasks based on common themes, it may not provide a clear picture of how to prioritize those tasks.
Another prioritization technique that can help with this is the story mapping method.
Let’s take a closer look at it.
The story mapping method
The story mapping method is a visual planning technique used to create a holistic view of a product or project from a user’s perspective. It was popularized by Jeff Patton, a software development and user experience expert, in his book “User Story Mapping”.
The story mapping method visually represents the user’s journey through the product or project.
Typically, users create the story map by placing sticky notes on a wall or whiteboard and logically arranging them, following the user’s path from the initial goal to the result.
Each sticky note represents a user story, which describes a feature or functionality the user wants to achieve.
The story map is organized into two main layers: the “backbone” and the “slices”. The backbone represents the high-level user journey, each sticky note describing a major milestone or step.
The slices represent the detailed features or tasks required to achieve each milestone, with each slice containing several related user stories.
By creating a story map, teams can better understand user needs and priorities and identify gaps or redundancies in the product or project. They can also use the story map to prioritize user stories based on their importance and to plan the product or project roadmap.
There are several software tools that managers can use to build and visualize story maps, including:
- Trello: a popular project management tool with basic story-mapping capabilities
- Miro: an online collaborative whiteboard with detailed and interactive story-mapping features
- StoriesOnBoard: a web-based tool designed specifically for story mapping with hierarchical and collaborative features
These tools can help managers create and visualize their story maps, making organizing and prioritizing features and requirements for their product development projects easier.
Another popular method is the product tree, which can help you break down your product features into a hierarchical structure. Let’s explore this technique in more detail.
The product tree method
The product tree method is a visual planning technique used to break down a product or project into its constituent parts and to identify the relationships between them. It was developed by Yves Pigneur and Alex Osterwalder, the authors of the popular business book “Business Model Generation”.
The product tree is a visual representation of the product or project with a tree-like structure of the main product or project at the bottom and the sub-products or sub-projects branching above it.
Users further break down each sub-product or sub-project into its parts, thereby creating a hierarchical structure that shows the relationships between the elements.
Users create the product tree by using a whiteboard or a software tool that supports visual diagramming. For example, Miro provides a built-in product tree template.
By creating a product tree, teams can prioritize different components of the product or project based on their importance to the overall design, or to plan the development roadmap.
Now we have looked at 13 prioritization methods. When comparing them, it can be helpful to take a broader view. The following table can help you choose the most appropriate method for your use case.
The ultimate prioritization showdown: which method will prevail?
Each prioritization method has its strengths, weaknesses, and unique approach.
To help you decide which method best suits your needs, we have created a comparison table outlining the key features and benefits of 13 popular prioritization techniques.
This table provides a quick reference guide to help you compare and contrast the methods in order to choose the most appropriate one for your situation.
|Common use cases
|RICE scoring model
|Scores initiatives based on Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort
|Helps prioritize initiatives based on the potential impact
|Product development, marketing campaigns
|ICE scoring model
|Scores initiatives based on Impact, Confidence, and Ease
|Simple and easy-to-use prioritization method
|Product development, marketing campaigns
|Ranks tasks based on urgency and importance, labeled A through E
|Helps prioritize tasks based on urgency and importance
|Daily task management, project planning
|Categorizes requirements as Must-haves, Should-haves, Could-haves, or Won’t-haves
|Prioritizes requirements based on importance
|Software development and project planning
|Prioritizes initiatives based on the cost of delay divided by job size
|Helps prioritize initiatives based on financial impact
|Agile software development, product portfolio management
|Prioritizes tasks based on urgency and importance, labeled as quadrants 1 to 4
|Helps prioritize tasks based on urgency and importance
|Daily task management, project planning
|Lean Prioritization Matrix
|Prioritizes initiatives based on value and effort
|Helps prioritize initiatives based on value and effort
|Product development and project planning
|Categorizes features as Must-have, Performance, and Delighters
|Helps identify features that meet customer needs
|Product development and customer satisfaction surveys
|Weighted Scoring Model
|Assigns weights to different criteria and scores each initiative based on those weights
|Allows for customized prioritization based on unique criteria
|Project planning, decision-making, and portfolio management
|Walking Skeleton technique
|Builds the simplest version of a product to demonstrate its value
|Allows for early feedback and validation
|Agile software development and prototyping
|Facilitates team brainstorming and decision-making through affinity diagrams
|Helps generate and organize ideas
|Project planning, team collaboration
|Breaks down initiatives into user stories and maps them out onto a timeline
|Helps visualize and prioritize product features
|Agile software development, product planning
|Product tree method
|Maps out the hierarchy of features and sub-features for a product
|Helps break down complex products into manageable components
|Product development, project planning
Now that we’ve explored various effective time management and prioritization techniques, it’s essential to understand how to choose the right tool for your needs.
In the following section, we’ll discuss various tools and software that can help you prioritize and manage your tasks efficiently.
Prioritization tools: how to pick the right one for your needs
With so many prioritization techniques available, knowing which one to use for a particular project or situation can be challenging. Choosing the right tool for prioritization is essential for effective decision-making and resource allocation.
Here are some tips for picking the right tool for your needs:
- Define your goals: determine what you want to achieve and select a tool that aligns with your objectives and key results.
- Consider your team: assess your team size, expertise, and working style to find a tool that fits.
- Evaluate complexity: choose a tool that matches the level of complexity you and your team are comfortable with.
- Assess available data: look at the available data and select a tool that can work with this data.
- Experiment: try out multiple tools and be open to adapting as needed to find the one that works best for you.
In addition to traditional prioritization techniques, there are a lot of tools for prioritization. Here are some examples of recommended tools:
- PPM Express: a cloud-based project portfolio management tool with portfolio and resource management, and reporting prioritization features based on strategic alignment, resource availability, and budget constraints.
- Smartsheet: a cloud-based project management tool with prioritization, collaboration, and automation features based on urgency, importance, and due date.
- Jira: an Agile project management tool with prioritization, sprint planning, and issue-tracking features based on business value, complexity, and risk.
You should now understand various tools and software that can help you prioritize and manage your tasks effectively.
By focusing your efforts on what is most important and urgent, you can achieve your goals and make a meaningful impact in your work and personal life.
If you’re looking for a tool to help with prioritization, try PPM Express.
With features for prioritization like building a “big picture” with comprehensive integration options, resource management, and reporting, PPM Express can help you prioritize projects and tasks based on strategic alignment, resource availability, and budget constraints.
Reap the benefits of optimizing your project portfolio management! Sign up now for a free trial of PPM Express and see how it can transform your project workflow.
FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)
RICE is a prioritization framework that helps teams decide which projects or initiatives to prioritize. It stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort, and it scores each project based on these four factors to create a numerical value that can be used to rank and compare projects.
WSJF stands for Weighted Shortest Job First and is a prioritization technique that helps teams decide which work items to focus on first. It considers the business value, time criticality, risk reduction, and job size of each work item to determine its priority.
The Kano Model prioritizes features based on customer needs and preferences. It involves categorizing features into Must-haves, Performance Features, and Delighters. Must-haves are essential features that customers expect, Performance Features improve the customer experience, and Delighters are unexpected features that surprise customers.
The MoSCoW method prioritizes requirements based on their importance to the project’s success. It involves categorizing requirements into four types: Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, and Won’t-have. Must-have requirements are critical and must be completed, while Should-have requirements can be postponed. Could-have requirements are desirable but not essential, and Won’t-have requirements are low priority and will not be addressed in the current project or iteration.
The ICE method prioritizes tasks or ideas based on their impact, confidence, and effort. Impact refers to the potential benefit or value of the task, Confidence refers to the team’s level of certainty about the task’s success, and Effort refers to the resources required to complete the task. Each factor is scored on a scale of 1 to 10, and the scores are multiplied together to determine the priority of each task.
The Weighted Scoring Model prioritizes projects or initiatives based on certain criteria or factors. Each factor is assigned a weight based on its importance, and each project is scored on each factor. The scores are then multiplied by the weights and added to create a total score for each project. Projects can then be ranked and compared based on their total score to determine which ones should be prioritized.
The main difference between MVP (Minimum Viable Product) and Walking Skeleton is the level of functionality or features included in each. MVP is a product that consists of the minimum set of features required to satisfy early adopters and test the market demand. On the other hand, Walking Skeleton is a prototype that includes only the essential features necessary to demonstrate the product’s value and get feedback from customers and stakeholders.
Prioritization frameworks can help teams decide which projects to work on first and how to allocate their time and resources effectively. By prioritizing initiatives based on their potential impact, effort required, and other factors, teams can maximize their productivity and deliver more value to stakeholders.
No, not every prioritization technique will be appropriate for any project or team. Different techniques may be more or less effective depending on the context, team goals, and specific challenges. It’s important to choose the most suitable method for the job and be willing to experiment and adjust as needed.
The frequency of priority re-evaluation depends on the team’s needs and the pace of their work. Some teams may need to re-evaluate priorities daily or weekly, while others may only need to do so once a month or quarter. It’s important to balance being responsive to changing circumstances and avoiding constant disruption to the team’s workflow.
Yes, prioritization frameworks can help avoid feature bloat by assisting teams to focus on the most important and valuable features to users. By prioritizing features based on their impact and value, teams can save time and resources on low-priority or unnecessary features.
One potential downside of prioritization frameworks is that they can sometimes overemphasize quantitative metrics and de-emphasize qualitative factors such as user feedback and intuition. Additionally, prioritization frameworks may not consider all complex factors that influence project success, such as team dynamics, budget constraints, and market conditions. Using prioritization frameworks as a tool is important, but you should only partially rely on them on.
MoSCoW prioritization is a simple yet effective technique that allows teams to prioritize their tasks and requirements based on their importance and urgency. The method is easy to use and understand, making it accessible to teams of any size and level of experience. It also provides a clear and structured decision-making framework, helping teams align their priorities and focus on the most critical tasks.
Depending on your needs and goals, you can use multiple prioritization techniques simultaneously. However, it’s important to remember that too many techniques can lead to confusion and inconsistency in decision-making. We recommend choosing a few techniques that work well together and align with your team’s goals and values.