Prioritization Frameworks Practice Exam

Question 1 Prioritization Frameworks

What is theory of constraints (TOC) in prioritization?

Deliberately ending a low-value feature, freeing maintenance capacity for higher-priority work. Identify the system's bottleneck and prioritize work that exploits or relieves it; other improvements are local. The smallest experiment that would update your belief about whether to invest more — accelerates learning loops. A method linking deliverables to behaviors to actors to goals — only deliverables that move the goal stay in scope.

Question 2 Prioritization Frameworks

What is portfolio prioritization?

One named person owns the call after input — prevents committee paralysis when the team is split. Arranging user stories along a user journey, then slicing horizontally to find a viable first release. Allocating disproportionate attention to whoever complains most rather than to whoever creates most value. Allocating effort across multiple bets (e.g., 70/20/10 core/adjacent/transformational) rather than ranking item by item.

Question 3 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "best-of-the-rest" anti-pattern?

Repeatedly chasing new ideas before finishing or learning from current bets — fragments execution. Picking the strongest item from a weak set instead of generating better options first. Kanban guidance: a half-done item delivers zero value, so prioritize finishing before opening new work. Everything can feel important in the moment, especially when teams face competing goals and incomplete information.

Question 4 Prioritization Frameworks

What is a swim-lane prioritization view?

A kanban view that splits items by class of service (e.g., expedite, standard, fixed-date) for targeted prio rules. A leadership maxim: a priority count beyond a handful means the list is a wishlist, not a priority list. Personal prioritization is choosing what work deserves your best energy instead of reacting to every request equally. Prioritization is the process of deciding what deserves attention first when time, energy, and resources are limited.

Question 5 Prioritization Frameworks

What is a premortem?

A pre-launch exercise imagining the project failed, then listing why — surfaces risks that should affect prioritization. The longest chain of dependent tasks accounting for resource constraints — drives total project duration. If everything is "priority 1" you're committing more than you can deliver — overbooking guarantees something breaks. Investing in discovery work before committing build effort — wrong build is more expensive than learning.

Question 6 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "innovation time"?

If a prio item hasn't moved in two weeks, escalate or kill it — prevents zombie commitments draining attention. Prioritizing within a single end-to-end customer value stream rather than splitting work by internal team boundary. Basic features customers expect; their absence causes dissatisfaction but their presence creates no delight. A standing reservation (e.g., one day per sprint) for exploration outside the roadmap.

Question 7 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "delayed binding" in roadmaps?

Over-weighting potential losses relative to gains — can cause teams to defend dying work rather than rebalance. A small investment with a large potential upside or downside — often deserves outsized prio attention. Committing to the next quarter precisely but only to themes beyond that — reduces premature commitment. Personal prioritization is choosing what work deserves your best energy instead of reacting to every request equally.

Question 8 Prioritization Frameworks

What are "quick wins" in a value-effort matrix?

High-value, low-effort items — usually the first to ship for early momentum. The team understands what matters now, what can wait, and why those choices were made. Average lead time = Work-In-Progress ÷ Throughput — adding WIP without throughput just slows everything. Aggressively removing items that no longer serve the goal; reduces cognitive load on every refinement.

Question 9 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "minimum lovable product" framing?

After a successful small test, deliberately scaling investment because the bet has been validated. A spin on MVP focused on the smallest version users will love, not just tolerate — sharpens scope decisions. "What if we did the opposite of the obvious priority?" — exposes unstated assumptions in the conventional answer. A sequencing decision determines not just what matters, but what should happen before something else.

Question 10 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "tip of the iceberg" question?

Repeatedly chasing new ideas before finishing or learning from current bets — fragments execution. A bias-toward-saying-no heuristic — preserves capacity when value isn't obvious enough to justify. Frequency, Audience, Severity, Time-sensitivity — a quick triage for support backlogs. "What else changes if we do this?" — surfaces hidden scope that should factor into the prio decision.

Question 11 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "discoverable urgency"?

Some tasks unlock many others, so their value is larger than their surface description suggests. Teresa Torres's method: link prioritization decisions back to a desired outcome through opportunities and tested solutions. A formal method that scores options across explicitly weighted criteria and aggregates them to support transparent choice. Urgency that is real but hidden until someone asks; some priorities only surface in good 1:1s or office hours.

Question 12 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "what would change our mind?" question?

Asks what evidence would cause a re-prio — sets a falsification standard rather than open-ended advocacy. (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort — yields impact per person-month. A bias-toward-saying-no heuristic — preserves capacity when value isn't obvious enough to justify. If a prio item hasn't moved in two weeks, escalate or kill it — prevents zombie commitments draining attention.

Question 13 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "the asymmetric bet"?

A small investment with a large potential upside or downside — often deserves outsized prio attention. RICE scores ideas by Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort to support product prioritization. A list of validated user problems, separate from the solution backlog, so prioritization happens at the problem level first. Horizon 1 protects current business, Horizon 2 grows adjacent business, Horizon 3 invests in emerging future business.

Question 14 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "eat the frog"?

Mark Twain–inspired rule: tackle the hardest or most-procrastinated task first thing in the morning. "Highest-Paid Person's Opinion" — when prioritization defaults to the most senior person rather than the strongest evidence. Cutting scope to the smallest version that still proves the bet — accelerates learning before larger investment. Horizon 1 protects current business, Horizon 2 grows adjacent business, Horizon 3 invests in emerging future business.

Question 15 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "boulders, rocks, pebbles, sand" framework?

Spending dedicated time each week reviewing the backlog so urgent grooming doesn't disrupt deep work mid-sprint. "Will we still wish we had done this in five years?" — separates trend chasing from durable bets. The point at which half of older items are no longer relevant — guides how aggressively to prune. A capacity metaphor: load the few biggest items first; smaller work fills around them without displacing them.

Question 16 Prioritization Frameworks

What is opportunity backlog?

A list of validated user problems, separate from the solution backlog, so prioritization happens at the problem level first. A method linking deliverables to behaviors to actors to goals — only deliverables that move the goal stay in scope. Investing extra capacity at the bottleneck — usually higher-leverage than optimizing non-bottleneck steps. Each in-progress item competes for attention, increases lead time, and raises the chance of context-switch errors.

Question 17 Prioritization Frameworks

What is multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA)?

Urgency invented to pressure a queue jump; healthy prio cultures challenge it openly. Asking whether the requesting customer is a high-trust design partner — their signal carries more credibility, not just more weight. Weighting requests by how many distinct users (not requests) they affect — fights vocal-minority distortion. A formal method that scores options across explicitly weighted criteria and aggregates them to support transparent choice.

Question 18 Prioritization Frameworks

What is queue discipline?

Letting recent failure patterns shape what gets prioritized next — turns lessons into resource allocation. An explicit list of efforts being stopped this period; broadcasts capacity recovered for new priorities. Prioritize features that help users accomplish underlying jobs rather than features for their own sake. The team's habit of not letting new asks jump live work without explicit re-prioritization.

Question 19 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "north star" prio alignment?

When a critical defect appears, all other prio is paused to fix it — borrowed from Toyota production. Every priority must trace to the org's single highest-level outcome — items that don't get questioned. Urgency invented to pressure a queue jump; healthy prio cultures challenge it openly. High-value, low-effort items — usually the first to ship for early momentum.

Question 20 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "Friday rule" for backlog grooming?

Once a metric becomes the priority target, gaming starts; metrics need pairing with countermeasures. Honor relationships while still declining the work — preserves trust without overcommitting capacity. Spending dedicated time each week reviewing the backlog so urgent grooming doesn't disrupt deep work mid-sprint. If we could do only one of these this month, which would matter most and why?

Question 21 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the Buy-a-Feature method?

A workshop technique where stakeholders are given fake money to "buy" features, revealing real priorities through allocation. It gives people a structured way to compare options instead of relying only on urgency or loud opinions. Choosing to ship to 1% → 10% → 50% → 100% — lets risk-sensitive items still launch without all-or-nothing prio fights. Some tasks unlock many others, so their value is larger than their surface description suggests.

Question 22 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the ICE framework?

A time-allocation metaphor: large rocks (priorities) go in first; smaller commitments and busywork fill remaining space. ICE scores work by Impact, Confidence, and Ease for quick lightweight prioritization. The team understands what matters now, what can wait, and why those choices were made. Agreeing the request is valid but committing to a later, named date instead of taking it now.

Question 23 Prioritization Frameworks

What is anchoring bias in prioritization?

The first effort or ROI estimate disproportionately shapes subsequent debate — counter by collecting estimates independently. The point at which half of older items are no longer relevant — guides how aggressively to prune. Low throughput often means too many parallel priorities, not too few people. Bright shiny problems can dominate attention even when they're not what moves the goal.

Question 24 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "rolling-wave" prioritization?

ICE skips Reach, so it can over-rate features that delight a small audience compared with broader-reach work. Mark Twain–inspired rule: tackle the hardest or most-procrastinated task first thing in the morning. Planning near-term work in detail while leaving later periods at coarser granularity — adapts as evidence arrives. A SAFe prioritization formula: Cost of Delay divided by Job Size — schedule the highest WSJF first.

Question 25 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "single-threading" a goal?

Prioritizing what a representative target customer would value most, not what loudest internal voice wants. Assigning one owner with unambiguous authority on a top priority — Amazon's mechanism for moving important bets fast. MoSCoW groups work into Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won't have for now. The first effort or ROI estimate disproportionately shapes subsequent debate — counter by collecting estimates independently.

Question 26 Prioritization Frameworks

What is loss-aversion bias in prioritization?

Picking the strongest item from a weak set instead of generating better options first. Comparing what the team actually did vs. what it committed to do — gap reveals prio discipline issues. Over-weighting potential losses relative to gains — can cause teams to defend dying work rather than rebalance. MoSCoW groups work into Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won't have for now.

Question 27 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "marginal value" reasoning?

Picking the strongest item from a weak set instead of generating better options first. Kanban guidance: a half-done item delivers zero value, so prioritize finishing before opening new work. Asking what the next unit of investment buys, not just whether the area matters in general. Effort is usually more uncertain than teams think, so estimates should inform decisions without pretending to be exact.

Question 28 Prioritization Frameworks

Why is urgency not always the same as importance?

Urgent work demands immediate attention, but important work shapes long-term outcomes. Agreeing the request is valid but committing to a later, named date instead of taking it now. "What would we have to stop doing to make room for this?" Effort is usually more uncertain than teams think, so estimates should inform decisions without pretending to be exact.

Question 29 Prioritization Frameworks

What is RICE Impact?

Stakeholder insight is valuable, but prioritization weakens when the loudest voice automatically wins. A typically 0.25-to-3 multiplier estimating per-user effect: minimal, low, medium, high, or massive. Imagining failure modes of the candidate priority and adjusting the choice or its scope to avoid them. The smallest experiment that would update your belief about whether to invest more — accelerates learning loops.

Question 30 Prioritization Frameworks

What is GTD's prioritization layer?

Once a metric becomes the priority target, gaming starts; metrics need pairing with countermeasures. A high-leverage task creates meaningful downstream benefit relative to the time or resources it requires. Agreeing the request is valid but committing to a later, named date instead of taking it now. GTD uses context, time available, energy, and priority (in that order) to pick the next action.

Question 31 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "default no" stance?

High-value, low-effort items — usually the first to ship for early momentum. Bezos's framing: Type 1 is hard to reverse (slow, deliberate); Type 2 is reversible (fast, biased to action). A formal method that scores options across explicitly weighted criteria and aggregates them to support transparent choice. When unsure, lean toward declining — preserves focus and forces requesters to make a sharper case.

Question 32 Prioritization Frameworks

What is a critical chain?

Asking whether the requesting customer is a high-trust design partner — their signal carries more credibility, not just more weight. Whoever benefits should bear a share of the cost — exposes whether the requester values the work as much as they claim. The longest chain of dependent tasks accounting for resource constraints — drives total project duration. The Eisenhower Matrix sorts work by urgency and importance to clarify what to do, schedule, delegate, or eliminate.

Question 33 Prioritization Frameworks

How is RICE calculated?

(Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort — yields impact per person-month. Asking whether the requesting customer is a high-trust design partner — their signal carries more credibility, not just more weight. Each switch carries minutes of reorientation; heavy multitasking can erase double-digit percentages of productive time. An explicit list of efforts being stopped this period; broadcasts capacity recovered for new priorities.

Question 34 Prioritization Frameworks

What does a prioritization framework do?

A capacity constraint is the realistic limit on how much work a person or team can absorb well. It gives people a structured way to compare options instead of relying only on urgency or loud opinions. MoSCoW groups work into Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won't have for now. Less slack means each "yes" excludes more — choices compound faster.

Question 35 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "compounding work" lens?

High-value, high-effort items requiring strategic commitment and careful planning. Avoiding options whose upside is bounded but downside is large — common in security and safety-critical work. Some work creates more capability that helps future work — prioritize compounders over one-offs when value is close. Scoring discipline: when stakeholders rate everything maximum impact, the scale stops conveying information.

Question 36 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "the inversion" question?

ICE scores work by Impact, Confidence, and Ease for quick lightweight prioritization. A method linking deliverables to behaviors to actors to goals — only deliverables that move the goal stay in scope. "What if we did the opposite of the obvious priority?" — exposes unstated assumptions in the conventional answer. If a task takes under 2 minutes, do it immediately rather than scheduling it — from Getting Things Done.

Question 37 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the airline-overbooking analogy?

One box for committed work, one for stretch — protects commitments while leaving room for opportunistic wins. The 80/20 rule: roughly 80% of outcomes come from 20% of inputs — focus on the high-leverage 20%. If everything is "priority 1" you're committing more than you can deliver — overbooking guarantees something breaks. A spin on MVP focused on the smallest version users will love, not just tolerate — sharpens scope decisions.

Question 38 Prioritization Frameworks

What is a high-leverage task?

Mark Twain–inspired rule: tackle the hardest or most-procrastinated task first thing in the morning. Ordering items so each occupies a unique position; resolves ties that "high/medium/low" hide. Deliberately ending a low-value feature, freeing maintenance capacity for higher-priority work. A high-leverage task creates meaningful downstream benefit relative to the time or resources it requires.

Question 39 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "bug burndown" prioritization?

Setting a target bug count and prioritizing bug work whenever the count drifts above the threshold. Re-rank the backlog from scratch periodically instead of only inserting; surfaces drift that incremental edits hide. Requiring a fixed percentage of items at each rating tier — prevents grade inflation. A cap on how many items can be "in progress" at once — used in kanban to force completion before new starts.

Question 40 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "reversible vs. irreversible" prioritization?

Move fast on cheap-to-reverse decisions; invest more analysis in decisions that lock in long-term commitments. Visibly celebrating finished priorities reinforces the finishing habit more than starting new ones. The team understands what matters now, what can wait, and why those choices were made. A SAFe prioritization formula: Cost of Delay divided by Job Size — schedule the highest WSJF first.

Question 41 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the Kano model?

Weighting requests by how many distinct users (not requests) they affect — fights vocal-minority distortion. Arranging user stories along a user journey, then slicing horizontally to find a viable first release. The Kano model classifies features by how they affect customer satisfaction: Must-be, Performance, Attractive, Indifferent, and Reverse categories. A bucket like Now/Next/Later that communicates relative timing without overcommitting to exact dates.

Question 42 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "sunsetting" as a prio action?

A column indicating how committed each timeline truly is — protects the team from false-precision asks. Asking what the next unit of investment buys, not just whether the area matters in general. Committing to the next quarter precisely but only to themes beyond that — reduces premature commitment. Deliberately ending a low-value feature, freeing maintenance capacity for higher-priority work.

Question 43 Prioritization Frameworks

What are "time sinks" in a value-effort matrix?

The minimum thing that, if shipped alone, would create measurable user or business value. Tests whether the candidate item is genuinely worth the opportunity cost of the entire team's quarter. Low-value, high-effort items that should usually be cut or deferred indefinitely. A column indicating how committed each timeline truly is — protects the team from false-precision asks.

Question 44 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "Wardley Map" technique?

Forces concrete near-term picture instead of vague aspiration — sharpens which work to prioritize first. A strategic map of value-chain components by evolution stage — prioritizes investments in stages where movement creates leverage. A spreadsheet listing options against weighted criteria, totaling a score per option — encodes the team's value system. Over-weighting potential losses relative to gains — can cause teams to defend dying work rather than rebalance.

Question 45 Prioritization Frameworks

What is Cost of Delay?

The economic impact per unit time of NOT having a feature done — combines business value, urgency, and risk reduction. Allocating disproportionate attention to whoever complains most rather than to whoever creates most value. Scoring discipline: when stakeholders rate everything maximum impact, the scale stops conveying information. A typically 0.25-to-3 multiplier estimating per-user effect: minimal, low, medium, high, or massive.

Question 46 Prioritization Frameworks

What is "shrink the change" prioritization?

Cutting scope to the smallest version that still proves the bet — accelerates learning before larger investment. Stakeholder insight is valuable, but prioritization weakens when the loudest voice automatically wins. The 80/20 rule: roughly 80% of outcomes come from 20% of inputs — focus on the high-leverage 20%. Kanban guidance: a half-done item delivers zero value, so prioritize finishing before opening new work.

Question 47 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the ICE limitation vs. RICE?

Critical but unglamorous work (security, accessibility, observability) chronically loses prio battles unless protected. A leadership maxim: a priority count beyond a handful means the list is a wishlist, not a priority list. ICE skips Reach, so it can over-rate features that delight a small audience compared with broader-reach work. Concentrating most effort on safe known wins, with a small slice on high-risk high-reward bets — balanced portfolio.

Question 48 Prioritization Frameworks

What is an example of a useful prioritization question?

Allocating disproportionate attention to whoever complains most rather than to whoever creates most value. Prioritize features that help users accomplish underlying jobs rather than features for their own sake. GTD uses context, time available, energy, and priority (in that order) to pick the next action. If we could do only one of these this month, which would matter most and why?

Question 49 Prioritization Frameworks

What is the "kill criteria" technique?

A cap on how many items can be "in progress" at once — used in kanban to force completion before new starts. Once a metric becomes the priority target, gaming starts; metrics need pairing with countermeasures. Investing in discovery work before committing build effort — wrong build is more expensive than learning. Defining in advance what evidence would cause a project to be deprioritized — fights the sunk-cost trap.

Question 50 Prioritization Frameworks

What is prioritization?

GTD uses context, time available, energy, and priority (in that order) to pick the next action. Prioritization is the process of deciding what deserves attention first when time, energy, and resources are limited. The opportunity cost of not having shipped high-value work — accrues silently while teams stay busy on low-value items. Some work creates more capability that helps future work — prioritize compounders over one-offs when value is close.