═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
DISCOVERY WAYPOINT — PRIORITIZATION FRAMEWORK SELECTION
Selected framework + scoring rubric | 45–60 min | 3–8 people | Difficulty: Low
discoverywaypoint.com/techniques/prioritization-framework-selection
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

BEFORE YOU START
  Portfolio / initiative list: ___________________________
  Date: _______________  Facilitator: _____________________
  Decision horizon: ______________________________________
  Who needs to trust this prioritization? ________________

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
STEP 1 — DECISION CONTEXT  [0–10 min]
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Number of initiatives to prioritize: ___
  Time horizon for this prioritization: __________________
  Key constraint: ________________________________________
  What "good" prioritization looks like for this context:
  __________________________________________________________

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
STEP 2 — FRAMEWORK COMPARISON  [10–30 min]
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Score each framework 1–3 on fit for your context.

  Framework          | Simple? | Defensible? | Works with our data? | Score
  ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Impact vs Effort   | ___     | ___         | ___                  | ___
  RICE (Reach/Impact/Confidence/Effort) | ___ | ___ | ___          | ___
  Risk-adjusted ROI  | ___     | ___         | ___                  | ___
  MoSCoW             | ___     | ___         | ___                  | ___
  Custom (define →)  | ___     | ___         | ___                  | ___

  Custom framework definition (if selected):
  Criteria: _____________________________________________

⚠ Select the simplest framework that can defend decisions.
  Complexity does not improve prioritization quality.

  Selected framework: ____________________________________

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
STEP 3 — CALIBRATE SCORING DEFINITIONS  [30–45 min]
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Define what each score means for this context. Use examples.

  IMPACT scoring:
    High (3): ___________________________________________
    Medium (2): _________________________________________
    Low (1): ____________________________________________
    Calibration example: ________________________________

  EFFORT scoring:
    High (3 = most effort): _____________________________
    Medium (2): _________________________________________
    Low (1 = least effort): _____________________________
    Calibration example: ________________________________

  (Add additional criteria rows if using RICE or custom)

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
STEP 4 — COMMIT + NEXT SESSION  [45–60 min]
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Framework committed: ___________________________________
  Scoring rubric owner: __________________________________
  Scoring session date: __________________________________
  Who attends scoring session: ___________________________

  Escalation rule (if scoring deadlocks):
  __________________________________________________________

───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
QUALITY CHECK
───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  ☐ Framework is the simplest that serves the context
  ☐ Every scoring level has a clear definition and example
  ☐ Scoring session is scheduled with a named owner
  ☐ Escalation rule is agreed

Full facilitation guide: discoverywaypoint.com/techniques/prioritization-framework-selection
Discovery Waypoint — discoverywaypoint.com