Analysis prompts
Analysis prompt

Prioritize a portfolio of initiatives using effort × impact

You have 10–20 proposed initiatives. You can fund 3–5. You want a defensible ranking, not a gut call.

Works best in: Claude

Help prioritize this list of initiatives using effort × impact scoring.

Inputs:
- List of initiatives with descriptions: {{paste}}
- Effort estimates per initiative (eng-weeks, dollars, whatever your unit is): {{paste}}
- Impact estimates (revenue, retention, market position, strategic optionality): {{paste — explicit about which dimension}}
- Strategic constraints: {{paste — what must happen, what must NOT happen this period}}
- Capacity: {{how many initiatives total can we run}}

Output:

## Scored ranking
| Initiative | Effort score (1-5) | Impact score (1-5) | Ratio | Strategic fit (high/med/low) | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|

## Top picks
The N initiatives we should fund, ranked. For each: why it earned the slot (1 sentence — not "high score").

## Honorable mentions
Initiatives that scored well but aren't making the cut. For each: what would change to bring it back into play.

## Defund / kill
Initiatives that should not happen even though they have advocates. Honest about the reason.

## The risky picks
Initiatives where the impact estimate is highly uncertain (could be very high, could be zero). For each: the small cheap test that would resolve the uncertainty.

## What scoring missed
The strategic factors not captured by effort × impact:
- Compounding effects (some initiatives unlock others)
- Defensive necessity (some initiatives prevent a downside)
- Talent/team development value
- Optionality value (initiatives that create future choices)

For each strategic factor, name the 1–2 initiatives where it overrides the raw ratio.

## Sensitivity check
If we re-scored under different weighting (e.g. weight impact 2x), how would the ranking change? If the ranking is stable, that's signal we got the scoring right. If it's volatile, the scoring is doing more work than it should.

Hard rules:
- Effort and impact estimates have ±30% confidence at best. Don't pretend the ratio is precise.
- Strategic fit is not a tiebreaker for cosmetic preferences — when it overrides ratio, name why
- Don't pad the top N to look balanced — if 2 dominate, say so
·Open in·Share
prioritizationportfoliostrategic-planning

More analysis prompts

All analysis prompts