Prioritize MVP Features: 5 Methods To Maximize MVP Success

5 Cool Methods to Prioritize Features for MVP Development

Deciding which features to include in your MVP Development can be a challenging task, as resources are often limited, and there are many competing priorities to consider.

In this blog, we’ll explore five cool methods for prioritizing features for MVP development, including the MoSCoW, Kano Model, Value vs. Complexity Matrix, RICE Scoring Model, and Story Mapping.

So without further ado, let’s get started.

5 Best Feature Prioritization Methods for MVPs

Let’s start with the easiest ones. We’ve saved the best for the last.

1. MoSCoW Prioritization

The MoSCoW technique was first introduced in the mid-1990s, and it has since become a popular prioritization technique used in various fields, including project management, product development, and software engineering.

Using MoSCoW, product owners prioritize features by categorizing them into four groups based on their importance:

• Must-haves (Mo): These are the features that are essential for the product to be considered viable. If a must-have feature is missing, the product will be unusable or fail to achieve its primary purpose.
• Should-haves (S): These are important features that are not critical but are still necessary for the product to be considered complete. Should-haves are features that customers expect to see and may become deal-breakers if they are missing.
• Could-haves (Co): These are nice-to-have features that would add value to the product but are not essential. Could-haves are usually added to make the product more attractive or competitive.
• Won’t-haves (W): These are features that will not be included in the product at this time. Won’t-haves are typically deferred to later versions of the product or removed entirely.

Source

Let’s see how an EdTech product will use the MoSCoW feature prioritization technique:

• Must-haves: For an EdTech product MVP, the must-have features might include the ability for users to sign up and create a profile, access course content, and complete lessons or modules. These features are critical to the product’s success, as without them, users wouldn’t be able to use the platform.
• Should-haves: Should-have features might include features that enhance the user experience, such as progress tracking, quizzes, and assessments. These features are important for the user to track their progress and stay motivated.
• Could-haves: Could-have features might include additional resources, such as discussion forums or live tutoring sessions, which would add value to the platform but are not essential for the MVP.
• Won’t-haves: Won’t-have features might include advanced features such as virtual reality lessons or complex analytics. These features are not necessary for the MVP and can be added later in future product versions.

Pros of MoSCoW

The MoSCoW technique is known for its speed and efficiency in orienting the design team toward prioritizing features. In as little as 30 minutes or during a single workshop, your team can use this method to identify and prioritize the most important features of the product.

Cons of MoSCoW

While MoSCoW is a useful tool for prioritizing design features, it has some limitations. For example, it does not consider non-design factors such as effort, cost, and time. Additionally, it may not involve technical representatives who can provide important insights into the feasibility and complexity of implementing certain features.

2. Kano Model

Kano Model is another popular technique for prioritizing features in a product or service. It was developed by Japanese researcher Noriaki Kano in the 1980s to help companies better understand and meet customer needs and preferences.

The Kano Model categorizes features into three main types: must-haves, performance attributes, and delighters.

Source: Mind Tool

Must-haves are basic requirements that customers expect from the product or service, such as quality, reliability, or functionality. Performance attributes directly impact the product’s performance or usability, such as speed, accuracy, or user interface design. Finally, delighters are unexpected or innovative features that can exceed customer expectations and provide a unique competitive advantage.

The Kano Model uses customer surveys or other feedback mechanisms to identify which features fall into each category. Once the features are classified, they can be prioritized based on their impact on customer satisfaction and their feasibility for implementation.

Let’s say you’re building a new social media platform, and you’ve identified several features you’d like to include in your MVP, such as:

• User profile creation
• News feed with algorithmic content recommendations
• Direct messaging between users
• Group chat functionality
• Ability to create and join groups
• Notifications for new followers and interactions

To use the Kano Model to prioritize these features, you would first conduct a survey or series of interviews with potential users to understand how they would react to each feature.

Here’s an example of how the survey questions and responses might look:

• How would you feel if the social media platform had a user profile creation feature?
• How would you feel if the social media platform had a news feed with an algorithmic content recommendations feature?
• How would you feel if the social media platform had a direct messaging between users feature?
• How would you feel if the social media platform had a group chat functionality feature?
• How would you feel if the social media platform had the ability to create and join groups feature?
• How would you feel if the social media platform had notifications for new followers and interactions feature?

The response options can be something like this:

• I would love it
• I would like it
• I am neutral
• I wouldn’t like it
• I would hate it

After collecting the survey responses, you can use the Kano Model to prioritize the features based on how they are perceived by users. Here’s an example of how the prioritization might look:

• Direct messaging between users (Must-have feature)
• News feed with algorithmic content recommendations (Performance feature)
• Group chat functionality (Attractive feature)
• User profile creation (Indifferent feature)
• Ability to create and join groups (Indifferent feature)
• Notifications for new followers and interactions (Reverse feature)

Pros of Kano Model

• Provides a customer-centric approach to prioritization, which can help improve customer satisfaction and loyalty.
• Can help identify opportunities for innovation and differentiation from competitors.
• Offers a structured framework for prioritizing features based on their impact on customer satisfaction and feasibility for implementation.

Cons of Kano Model

• Relies on customer feedback and surveys, which can be time-consuming and resource-intensive.
• May not consider other important factors such as cost, technical feasibility, or market trends.
• May not provide clear guidance on the implementation or development of features.

3. Value vs. Complexity Matrix

The Value vs. Complexity Matrix is a simple but effective way to prioritize features based on their potential value to users and the complexity involved in developing them. It helps product teams focus on building features with the greatest impact while minimizing the effort required to build them.

The matrix is typically divided into four quadrants, each representing a different combination of high or low value and high or low complexity. The quadrants are:

• Quick Wins: Features that are easy to implement but offer high value to users. These should be prioritized first because they can have an immediate impact on user satisfaction and engagement.
• Must-Haves: Features that are both high value and high complexity. These are essential to the product’s success and should be given a high priority, even if they require more time and effort to develop.
• Question Marks: Features that are low complexity but have uncertain value. These should be investigated further to determine if they are worth pursuing.
• Time-Consumers: Features that are both low value and high complexity. These should be deprioritized or postponed, as they are unlikely to have a significant impact on user satisfaction.

Source

Here’s an example of how a SaaS product can use the Value vs. Complexity Matrix to prioritize features:

Let’s say you are building project management software for small businesses. You’ve identified several potential features to include in your MVP, including:

• Time tracking and invoicing
• Task management with labels and tags
• Gantt chart view
• Integration with third-party tools
• Customizable project templates

To use the Value vs. Complexity Matrix, you would assess each feature based on its potential value to users and the complexity involved in developing it. Here’s an example of how the matrix might look:

Pros of Value vs. Complexity Matrix

• Simple and easy to use
• Focuses on value
• Helps with resource allocation
• Provides a clear roadmap

Cons of Value vs. Complexity Matrix

• Limited in scope
• Subjective judgments
• Ignores dependencies between features
• Lack of flexibility