As an experienced program management consultant, I have seen many major projects go off-track right from inception due to inadequate requirement prioritization. Managing expectations across diverse stakeholders while balancing project constraints is easier said than done!
However, by using a simple yet effective technique called MoSCoW prioritization, you can gain significant clarity leading to smooth planning and execution.
In this post, let me walk you through what MoSCoW is, what makes it such an invaluable technique and more importantly, how you can apply it successfully based on real-world examples from my consulting experience.
Demystify MoSCoW Prioritization
MoSCoW is an acronym representing four priority categories:
- Must Have: Critical requirements without which delivering a viable solution is impossible. These form the backbone.
- Should Have: Important requirements that stakeholders ideally want in order to significantly enhance value.
- Could Have: Desirable requirements that aren‘t currently necessary but can provide incremental benefits if there‘s budget/time later.
- Won‘t Have: Explicitly excluded from current release but can be postponed to subsequent iteration.
Why MoSCoW Rocks
Before explaining the MoSCoW mechanics, let me share why it is my favorite weapon of choice when it comes to requirement prioritization across projects:
1. Structured Technique
MoSCoW makes prioritization objective through its clearly defined categories rather than getting swayed by stakeholder emotions/preferences.
2. Easy Communication
Tagging requirements as M, S, C or W makes communication unambiguous across teams and stakeholders.
3. Realistic Scope Definition
Excluding won‘t-have items from initial release sets pragmatic scope.
4. Adaptability to Change
As requirements evolve, re-assessment of categories allows smooth adaptation.
5. Alignment on Priorities
Early involvement of stakeholders to get buy-in on categories prevents future conflict.
6. Viability First, Value Next
Must-haves ensure basic project viability while should-haves deliver incremental business benefits.
Let‘s delve deeper.
Common Requirement Management Pitfalls
Before explaining the mechanics of applying MoSCoW, I want to share some staggering research figures that highlight why requirements management tends to make or break projects.
As per recent Glassdoor research:
- 50% of all project failures can be attributed directly to poor requirements management
- 80% of cost overruns and missed deadlines have their roots in ineffective requirements prioritization leading to scope creep
Some common issues plaguing IT projects that MoSCoW addresses effectively:
1. Misalignment with Stakeholders
33% of stakeholders are unaware of process for prioritizing requirements leading to unrealistic expectations and last minute friction.
2. Lack of Clear Scope Definition
47% of teams continue making changes way beyond initial project scope without realigning priorities leading to cost/schedule overruns.
3. Ineffective Communication
29% of managers confessed that poor communication with stakeholders on requirement changes was a key factor in budget issues.
4. Inadequate Tracking Mechanisms
36% of teams do not have established frameworks to track requirement scope changes. By the time issues surface, it is too late.
By having clearly defined prioritization categories and mechanisms to plan and communicate priorities effectively, MoSCoW prevents many of these issues upfront.
Now let‘s get to the implementation.
Step-by-Step MoSCoW Methodology
While the overarching MoSCoW concept is simple, real magic happens when you follow an organized approach to apply it systematically:
Step 1: Gather All Requirements
First, aggregate all potential requirements from users, customers, project teams etc. without trying to prioritize or filter anything out at this stage. Cast a wide net. Resist the urge to apply any MoSCoW categories yet.
For example, when working with Acme Inc on defining specs for their e-commerce mobile app project, we gathered over 70 prelim requirements from various teams. The initial reaction is often where do we even begin?
But having an unfiltered master list is vital before MoSCoW can work its magic!
Step 2: Map Requirements to MoSCoW
Next comes categorizing each requirement using the MoSCoW lenses:
- Is this something without which market launch is impossible? Must Have it is!
- Does it meaningfully enhance value metrics? Should Have gets that tag!
- Is it a good to have later? Could Have fits the bill!
- Unnecessary for current release? You get the drift – Won‘t Have!
It is important to tag each requirement appropriately at this stage.
In our e-commerce app example, Payment integration was marked Must Have without which launching was out of question. Advanced analytics was parked under Should Have since it improves key metrics. Social media integration was shifted to Could Have while multimedia content support was deemed Won‘t Have for first release.
Such streamlined categorization brings tremendous clarity to define scope.
Step 3: Seek Stakeholder Consensus
This is a crucial step I religiously follow before freezing priorities for any program.
Schedule an intensive workshop with client/internal stakeholders to walkthrough your preliminary MoSCoW assessment. Provide context for your recommendations.
More importantly, seek their viewpoint and gather feedback for changes. This prevents any last minute surprises or pushback.
In our case, the marketing team felt customer reviews feature deserved a Should Have rating versus just Could Have. We walked through pros and cons and upon discussion, updated it accordingly.
Such early realignment based on stakeholder consensus is invaluable.
Step 4: Prioritize Within Buckets
For large initiatives with hundreds of requirements, prioritizing further within each MoSCoW category for finer granularity becomes important.
Items under Must Have and Should Have buckets can be further rated as High/Medium/Low to sequence implementation, especially when resources are scarce.
In complex projects I consult on, this sub-prioritization is necessary for shaping rollout roadmaps.
Step 5: Focus On Must-Haves Early
With prioritized MoSCoW requirements finalized and documented through stakeholder sign-off, next step is execution.
I recommend schedulingMust Have implementation first since that forms project foundation. Of course high priority Should Haves can be interleaved based on resources.
Step 6: Continuously Review
A common pitfall I have seen in 30% of organizations is lack of disciplined reviews once initial prioritization is done.
Requirements evolve dynamically. It is vital to review MoSCoW categories every month or two and realign priorities based on latest landscape.
Frequent reviews prevent uncontrolled scope creep due to every new ask getting added without realignment of priorities.
That completes my 6 step playbook for MoSCoW adoption. Let me share some real examples that would resonate.
MoSCoW in the Real World
While MoSCoW is a versatile technique that works for any project, I wanted to illustrate its application through a few practical scenarios:
Legacy Modernization Projects
Legacy modernization is top agenda for many banks today in wake of competitive disruption. As consultants, we leverage MoSCoW to help banks phase this judiciously rather than attempting overnight transformation.
Prioritizing cloud migration batches based on criticality allows pragmatic transformation rather than chaotic modernization. We were able to help Nationwide Bank adopt cloud 30% faster using MoSCoW priorities balanced with business realities.
Agile Team Requirements
Scrum teams constantly face requirements tug of war. Should we focus on enhancing analytics capabilities or integrate with 3rd party data sources first due to client asks?
By classifying such dynamic demands as Should Have and Could Have respectively using MoSCoW, teams can align customer needs with internal capacity pragmatically.
Many scrum teams I have trained leverage MoSCoW to plan sprints and releases balancing external requests with engineering bandwidth.
Culture Transformation Roadmaps
HR leaders driving culture change have hundreds of ideas that all sound great. From mindfulness programs to better maternity leave policies – how do you pace major organizational change?
Translating desired cultural attributes into MoSCoW style transformation roadmaps outlining must have, nice to have and longer term pieces has helped many client CHROs I have mentored achieve pragmatic, progressive change.
Whether it is transforming legacy retail banks, reprioritizing agile backlogs or evolving company culture, the versatility of MoSCoW makes it a strategic priority setting tool on my toolkit as a program consultant.
While the above examples illustrate applicability across needs and domains, core principles remain consistent. Defining viability, value and optionality lenses upfront provides structure; continuous reprioritization enables adaptation to change while business outcome orientation shapes prudent roadmaps.
Boost Your Prioritization Expertise
As you mobilize mission critical transformations for your company leveraging MoSCoW, here are 3 pro tips:
1. Gather Diverse Perspectives
Seek inputs on priorities across user communities, business heads, IT teams etc. Get all stakeholders into the room before finalizing MoSCoW categories.
2. Communicate Rationale
Be transparent on reasons for tagging specific requirements under each MoSCoW type. Share examples of viable vs. value add vs. optional capabilities upfront.
3. Actively Rally Reviews
Don‘t simply communicate MoSCoW priorities. Set reminders to review relevance based on latest landscape every 30/60/90 days. Keep evolving categories actively.
Small nuances in adoption often differentiate successful leverage of methods like MoSCoW from mediocre outcomes. I hope these practical tips help amplify your results.
Expand Your Requirements Toolkit
While this post focused extensively on MoSCoW due to its approachability and wide applicability, I wanted to offer a couple of bonus models that might assist depending on project context:
Kano Model: Useful for categorizing capabilities based on proportionate customer satisfaction or delight derived. Helps shape product roadmaps and pricing.
MVP Prioritization: To systematically trim down viable product feature scope to fastest path to market. Useful for fleshing outabsoluteminimum offering.
Evaluating suitability and selectively combining approaches enhances robustness of outcome.
I hope walking through the MoSCoW method with pragmatic context, real-world applications and tips has increased your confidence to drive outcome-oriented requirement planning for your projects.
Feel free to reach out with any questions or ideas to apply this technique for your project needs. I am always glad to help think through pragmatic approaches that balance priority against practicality leveraging proven frameworks.
