Initial commit from agent
This commit is contained in:
45
skills/brainstorming/roadmap-opportunity-prioritization.md
Normal file
45
skills/brainstorming/roadmap-opportunity-prioritization.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
|
||||
# Roadmap and Opportunity Prioritization
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
Choose what to do next by comparing opportunities, maintenance work, and strategic bets against explicit decision criteria.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to use
|
||||
|
||||
- Too many plausible initiatives compete for limited time
|
||||
- Feature work and maintenance work need to be balanced
|
||||
- A team needs a more defensible roadmap discussion
|
||||
- Promising ideas need sequencing rather than more generation
|
||||
|
||||
## Inputs to gather
|
||||
|
||||
- Candidate initiatives or workstreams
|
||||
- Decision criteria such as impact, urgency, effort, risk reduction, or strategic fit
|
||||
- Dependencies, timing constraints, and team capacity
|
||||
- Evidence for expected payoff or avoided risk
|
||||
|
||||
## How to work
|
||||
|
||||
- Make prioritization criteria explicit before ranking work.
|
||||
- Compare user value, strategic value, and risk reduction together.
|
||||
- Treat maintenance and enabling work as first-class opportunities when they materially improve future delivery.
|
||||
- Distinguish what is urgent, what is high leverage, and what is merely attractive.
|
||||
- Produce a sequence that a team can actually act on.
|
||||
|
||||
## Output expectations
|
||||
|
||||
- Prioritized list or roadmap recommendation
|
||||
- Clear rationale for order and tradeoffs
|
||||
- Notes on what to defer, revisit, or validate next
|
||||
|
||||
## Quality checklist
|
||||
|
||||
- Priorities reflect stated criteria rather than intuition alone.
|
||||
- Sequencing respects dependencies and capacity.
|
||||
- Lower-priority items are deferred for a reason, not forgotten accidentally.
|
||||
- Maintenance work is evaluated on outcomes, not optics.
|
||||
|
||||
## Handoff notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Note what new evidence would most change the ranking.
|
||||
- Pair with maintenance and technical debt planning or structured brainstorming when the decision needs deeper shaping.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user