Beyond the Backlog

As discussed in the two previous posts on prioritization frameworks (post 1, post 2), prioritizing the product backlog is one of the most important, and challenging, responsibilities for any Product Manager. With long lists of features, enhancements, bugs and other tasks, determining what to build first can be difficult. This is where the MoSCoW framework for prioritization can help.

MoSCoW stands for Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won’t have. This simple yet effective framework categorizes each backlog item into one of four priority levels:

• Must have: Features that are critical and necessary for a minimum viable product. These are absolute essentials.
• Should have: Important features that provide significant value but are not mandatory.
• Could have: Desirable but not critical features that can enhance the product.
• Won’t have: Items that are low priority or not feasible at this time.

The major benefit of the MoSCoW framework is that it brings clarity in communicating priorities to stakeholders. Rather than a long, unorganized backlog, MoSCoW provides clear grouping of items by level of urgency and importance.

In this post, we’ll provide an example of how Product Managers can utilize the MoSCoW framework to categorize and prioritize backlog items.

MoSCow Framework

Let’s take a look at an example of how the MoSCoW framework can be used in practice:

1. Categorize Backlog Items: Group the backlog items into four priority levels:
   • Must-Have: Critical and necessary for the product’s success.
   • Should-Have: Important but not as critical as must-haves.
   • Could-Have: Desirable features, not essential.
   • Won’t-Have: Low-priority or currently not feasible items.

2. Assign Priorities:
   • Must-Have: Identify items that are indispensable for a functional product.
   • Should-Have: Select features that significantly enhance the product but are not deal-breakers.
   • Could-Have: Consider features that add value if resources allow.
   • Won’t-Have: List items that are low-priority or not feasible given current constraints.

3. Communicate Priorities: Clearly communicate the priority levels to stakeholders, development teams, and other relevant parties.

Example:

Suppose you have three backlog items:

• Item M: Must-Have (e.g., User authentication)
• Item S: Should-Have (e.g., Social media integration)
• Item C: Could-Have (e.g., Customizable themes)
• Item W: Won’t-Have (e.g., Virtual reality integration, not feasible currently)

Priority Order:

1. Item M (Must-Have): Essential for a functional product.
2. Item S (Should-Have): Important for enhancing user experience.
3. Item C (Could-Have): Desirable, if resources and time permit.
4. Item W (Won’t-Have): Low-priority or not currently feasible.

Conclusion

The MoSCoW framework provides a simple yet powerful way to categorize your backlog items based on priority.

By grouping features and tasks into Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won’t have, you can bring much-needed clarity in communicating priorities across your stakeholders. MoSCoW enables you to align your roadmap on the critical few items that matter most to achieving your product vision.

While MoSCoW is easy to understand at a high level, effective implementation requires thought and care. Be sure to actively engage with your stakeholders, gather sufficient data, and regularly re-evaluate priorities as new information emerges.

Used judiciously, MoSCoW allows you to optimize your backlog to focus on delivering the maximum viable product first. Deferred lower priority items can be parked for potential later implementation.

The key takeaways are:

• MoSCoW provides a straightforward prioritization model for messy backlogs
• Clearly communicating priorities is essential for stakeholder alignment
• Must have items should be ruthlessly prioritized for the MVP
• Regularly revisit and re-prioritize items as needed

I hope this post has provided a useful introduction to implementing MoSCoW for your backlog. The clarity it provides will help you deliver better products that solve real customer needs.

If you liked this post on the MoSCoW Framework, you may also like:

• Prioritization Frameworks Part I: The ICE Framework
• Prioritization Frameworks Part II: Jobs to be Done Prioritization
• Estimating Part I: Tools and Techniques to Accurately Estimate Deliverables