Addresses feedback from AI Agent Skills Benchmark (80/100 → target 88+):
SKILL.md restructured:
- Added table of contents for Progressive Disclosure Architecture
- Fixed second-person voice ("your" → imperative form throughout)
- Added concrete input/output examples for RICE and interview tools
- Added validation steps to all 3 workflows (prioritization, discovery, PRD)
- Removed duplicate RICE framework definition
- Reduced content by moving frameworks to reference file
New: references/frameworks.md (~560 lines)
Comprehensive framework reference including:
- Prioritization: RICE (detailed), Value/Effort Matrix, MoSCoW, ICE, Kano
- Discovery: Customer Interview Guide, Hypothesis Template, Opportunity
Solution Tree, Jobs to Be Done
- Metrics: North Star, HEART Framework, Funnel Analysis, Feature Success
- Strategic: Product Vision Template, Competitive Analysis, GTM Checklist
Changes target +8 points per benchmark quick wins:
- TOC added (+2 PDA)
- Frameworks moved to reference (+3 PDA)
- Input/output examples added (+1 Utility)
- Second-person voice fixed (+1 Writing Style)
- Duplicate content consolidated (+1 PDA)
Resolves #54
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
16 KiB
Product Management Frameworks
Comprehensive reference for prioritization, discovery, and measurement frameworks.
Table of Contents
Prioritization Frameworks
RICE Framework
Formula:
RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) / Effort
Components:
| Component | Description | Values |
|---|---|---|
| Reach | Users affected per quarter | Numeric count (e.g., 5000) |
| Impact | Effect on each user | massive=3x, high=2x, medium=1x, low=0.5x, minimal=0.25x |
| Confidence | Certainty in estimates | high=100%, medium=80%, low=50% |
| Effort | Person-months required | xl=13, l=8, m=5, s=3, xs=1 |
Example Calculation:
Feature: Mobile Push Notifications
Reach: 10,000 users
Impact: massive (3x)
Confidence: medium (80%)
Effort: medium (5 person-months)
RICE = (10,000 × 3 × 0.8) / 5 = 4,800
Interpretation Guidelines:
- 1000+: High priority - strong candidates for next quarter
- 500-999: Medium priority - consider for roadmap
- 100-499: Low priority - keep in backlog
- <100: Deprioritize - requires new data to reconsider
When to Use RICE:
- Quarterly roadmap planning
- Comparing features across different product areas
- Communicating priorities to stakeholders
- Resolving prioritization debates with data
RICE Limitations:
- Requires reasonable estimates (garbage in, garbage out)
- Doesn't account for dependencies
- May undervalue platform investments
- Reach estimates can be gaming-prone
Value vs Effort Matrix
Low Effort High Effort
+--------------+------------------+
High Value | QUICK WINS | BIG BETS |
| [Do First] | [Strategic] |
+--------------+------------------+
Low Value | FILL-INS | TIME SINKS |
| [Maybe] | [Avoid] |
+--------------+------------------+
Quadrant Definitions:
| Quadrant | Characteristics | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Quick Wins | High impact, low effort | Prioritize immediately |
| Big Bets | High impact, high effort | Plan strategically, validate ROI |
| Fill-Ins | Low impact, low effort | Use to fill sprint gaps |
| Time Sinks | Low impact, high effort | Avoid unless required |
Portfolio Balance:
- Ideal mix: 40% Quick Wins, 30% Big Bets, 20% Fill-Ins, 10% Buffer
- Review balance quarterly
- Adjust based on team morale and strategic goals
MoSCoW Method
| Category | Definition | Sprint Allocation |
|---|---|---|
| Must Have | Critical for launch; product fails without it | 60% of capacity |
| Should Have | Important but workarounds exist | 20% of capacity |
| Could Have | Desirable enhancements | 10% of capacity |
| Won't Have | Explicitly out of scope (this release) | 0% - documented |
Decision Criteria for "Must Have":
- Regulatory/legal requirement
- Core user job cannot be completed without it
- Explicitly promised to customers
- Security or data integrity requirement
Common Mistakes:
- Everything becomes "Must Have" (scope creep)
- Not documenting "Won't Have" items
- Treating "Should Have" as optional (they're important)
- Forgetting to revisit for next release
ICE Scoring
Formula:
ICE Score = (Impact + Confidence + Ease) / 3
| Component | Scale | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Impact | 1-10 | Expected effect on key metric |
| Confidence | 1-10 | How sure are you about impact? |
| Ease | 1-10 | How easy to implement? |
When to Use ICE vs RICE:
- ICE: Early-stage exploration, quick estimates
- RICE: Quarterly planning, cross-team prioritization
Kano Model
Categories of feature satisfaction:
| Type | Absent | Present | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic (Must-Be) | Dissatisfied | Neutral | High - table stakes |
| Performance (Linear) | Neutral | Satisfied proportionally | Medium - differentiation |
| Excitement (Delighter) | Neutral | Very satisfied | Strategic - competitive edge |
| Indifferent | Neutral | Neutral | Low - skip unless cheap |
| Reverse | Satisfied | Dissatisfied | Avoid - remove if exists |
Feature Classification Questions:
- How would you feel if the product HAS this feature?
- How would you feel if the product DOES NOT have this feature?
Discovery Frameworks
Customer Interview Guide
Structure (35 minutes total):
1. CONTEXT QUESTIONS (5 min)
└── Build rapport, understand role
2. PROBLEM EXPLORATION (15 min)
└── Dig into pain points
3. SOLUTION VALIDATION (10 min)
└── Test concepts if applicable
4. WRAP-UP (5 min)
└── Referrals, follow-up
Detailed Script:
Phase 1: Context (5 min)
"Thanks for taking the time. Before we dive in..."
- What's your role and how long have you been in it?
- Walk me through a typical day/week.
- What tools do you use for [relevant task]?
Phase 2: Problem Exploration (15 min)
"I'd love to understand the challenges you face with [area]..."
- What's the hardest part about [task]?
- Can you tell me about the last time you struggled with this?
- What did you do? What happened?
- How often does this happen?
- What does it cost you (time, money, frustration)?
- What have you tried to solve it?
- Why didn't those solutions work?
Phase 3: Solution Validation (10 min)
"Based on what you've shared, I'd like to get your reaction to an idea..."
[Show prototype/concept - keep it rough to invite honest feedback]
- What's your initial reaction?
- How does this compare to what you do today?
- What would prevent you from using this?
- How much would this be worth to you?
- Who else would need to approve this purchase?
Phase 4: Wrap-up (5 min)
"This has been incredibly helpful..."
- Anything else I should have asked?
- Who else should I talk to about this?
- Can I follow up if I have more questions?
Interview Best Practices:
- Never ask "would you use this?" (people lie about future behavior)
- Ask about past behavior: "Tell me about the last time..."
- Embrace silence - count to 7 before filling gaps
- Watch for emotional reactions (pain = opportunity)
- Record with permission; take minimal notes during
Hypothesis Template
Format:
We believe that [building this feature/making this change]
For [target user segment]
Will [achieve this measurable outcome]
We'll know we're right when [specific metric moves by X%]
We'll know we're wrong when [falsification criteria]
Example:
We believe that adding saved payment methods
For returning customers
Will increase checkout completion rate
We'll know we're right when checkout completion increases by 15%
We'll know we're wrong when completion rate stays flat after 2 weeks
or saved payment adoption is < 20%
Hypothesis Quality Checklist:
- Specific user segment defined
- Measurable outcome (number, not "better")
- Timeframe for measurement
- Clear falsification criteria
- Based on evidence (interviews, data)
Opportunity Solution Tree
Structure:
[DESIRED OUTCOME]
│
├── Opportunity 1: [User problem/need]
│ ├── Solution A
│ ├── Solution B
│ └── Experiment: [Test to validate]
│
├── Opportunity 2: [User problem/need]
│ ├── Solution C
│ └── Solution D
│
└── Opportunity 3: [User problem/need]
└── Solution E
Example:
[Increase monthly active users by 20%]
│
├── Users forget to return
│ ├── Weekly email digest
│ ├── Mobile push notifications
│ └── Test: A/B email frequency
│
├── New users don't find value quickly
│ ├── Improved onboarding wizard
│ └── Personalized first experience
│
└── Users churn after free trial
├── Extended trial for engaged users
└── Friction audit of upgrade flow
Process:
- Start with measurable outcome (not solution)
- Map opportunities from user research
- Generate multiple solutions per opportunity
- Design small experiments to validate
- Prioritize based on learning potential
Jobs to Be Done
JTBD Statement Format:
When [situation/trigger]
I want to [motivation/job]
So I can [expected outcome]
Example:
When I'm running late for a meeting
I want to notify attendees quickly
So I can set appropriate expectations and reduce anxiety
Force Diagram:
┌─────────────────┐
Push from │ │ Pull toward
current ──────>│ SWITCH │<────── new
solution │ DECISION │ solution
│ │
└─────────────────┘
^ ^
| |
Anxiety of | | Habit of
change ──────┘ └────── status quo
Interview Questions for JTBD:
- When did you first realize you needed something like this?
- What were you using before? Why did you switch?
- What almost prevented you from switching?
- What would make you go back to the old way?
Metrics Frameworks
North Star Metric Framework
Criteria for a Good NSM:
- Measures value delivery: Captures what users get from product
- Leading indicator: Predicts business success
- Actionable: Teams can influence it
- Measurable: Trackable on regular cadence
Examples by Business Type:
| Business | North Star Metric | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Spotify | Time spent listening | Measures engagement value |
| Airbnb | Nights booked | Core transaction metric |
| Slack | Messages sent in channels | Team collaboration value |
| Dropbox | Files stored/synced | Storage utility delivered |
| Netflix | Hours watched | Entertainment value |
Supporting Metrics Structure:
[NORTH STAR METRIC]
│
├── Breadth: How many users?
├── Depth: How engaged are they?
└── Frequency: How often do they engage?
HEART Framework
| Metric | Definition | Example Signals |
|---|---|---|
| Happiness | Subjective satisfaction | NPS, CSAT, survey scores |
| Engagement | Depth of involvement | Session length, actions/session |
| Adoption | New user behavior | Signups, feature activation |
| Retention | Continued usage | D7/D30 retention, churn rate |
| Task Success | Efficiency & effectiveness | Completion rate, time-on-task, errors |
Goals-Signals-Metrics Process:
- Goal: What user behavior indicates success?
- Signal: How would success manifest in data?
- Metric: How do we measure the signal?
Example:
Feature: New checkout flow
Goal: Users complete purchases faster
Signal: Reduced time in checkout, fewer drop-offs
Metrics:
- Median checkout time (target: <2 min)
- Checkout completion rate (target: 85%)
- Error rate (target: <2%)
Funnel Analysis Template
Standard Funnel:
Acquisition → Activation → Retention → Revenue → Referral
│ │ │ │ │
│ │ │ │ │
How do First Come back Pay for Tell
they find "aha" regularly value others
you? moment
Metrics per Stage:
| Stage | Key Metrics | Typical Benchmark |
|---|---|---|
| Acquisition | Visitors, CAC, channel mix | Varies by channel |
| Activation | Signup rate, onboarding completion | 20-30% visitor→signup |
| Retention | D1/D7/D30 retention, churn | D1: 40%, D7: 20%, D30: 10% |
| Revenue | Conversion rate, ARPU, LTV | 2-5% free→paid |
| Referral | NPS, viral coefficient, referrals/user | NPS > 50 is excellent |
Analysis Framework:
- Map current conversion rates at each stage
- Identify biggest drop-off point
- Qualitative research: Why are users leaving?
- Hypothesis: What would improve conversion?
- Test and measure
Feature Success Metrics
| Metric | Definition | Target Range |
|---|---|---|
| Adoption | % users who try feature | 30-50% within 30 days |
| Activation | % who complete core action | 60-80% of adopters |
| Frequency | Uses per user per time | Weekly for engagement features |
| Depth | % of feature capability used | 50%+ of core functionality |
| Retention | Continued usage over time | 70%+ at 30 days |
| Satisfaction | Feature-specific NPS/rating | NPS > 30, Rating > 4.0 |
Measurement Cadence:
- Week 1: Adoption and initial activation
- Week 4: Retention and depth
- Week 8: Long-term satisfaction and business impact
Strategic Frameworks
Product Vision Template
Format:
FOR [target customer]
WHO [statement of need or opportunity]
THE [product name] IS A [product category]
THAT [key benefit, compelling reason to use]
UNLIKE [primary competitive alternative]
OUR PRODUCT [statement of primary differentiation]
Example:
FOR busy professionals
WHO need to stay informed without information overload
Briefme IS A personalized news digest
THAT delivers only relevant stories in 5 minutes
UNLIKE traditional news apps that require active browsing
OUR PRODUCT learns your interests and filters automatically
Competitive Analysis Framework
| Dimension | Us | Competitor A | Competitor B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Target User | |||
| Core Value Prop | |||
| Pricing | |||
| Key Features | |||
| Strengths | |||
| Weaknesses | |||
| Market Position |
Strategic Questions:
- Where do we have parity? (table stakes)
- Where do we differentiate? (competitive advantage)
- Where are we behind? (gaps to close or ignore)
- What can only we do? (unique capabilities)
Go-to-Market Checklist
Pre-Launch (4 weeks before):
- Success metrics defined and instrumented
- Launch/rollback criteria established
- Support documentation ready
- Sales enablement materials complete
- Marketing assets prepared
- Beta feedback incorporated
Launch Week:
- Staged rollout plan (1% → 10% → 50% → 100%)
- Monitoring dashboards live
- On-call rotation scheduled
- Communications ready (in-app, email, blog)
- Support team briefed
Post-Launch (2 weeks after):
- Metrics review vs. targets
- User feedback synthesized
- Bug/issue triage complete
- Iteration plan defined
- Stakeholder update sent
Framework Selection Guide
| Situation | Recommended Framework |
|---|---|
| Quarterly roadmap planning | RICE + Portfolio Matrix |
| Sprint-level prioritization | MoSCoW |
| Quick feature comparison | ICE |
| Understanding user satisfaction | Kano |
| User research synthesis | JTBD + Opportunity Tree |
| Feature experiment design | Hypothesis Template |
| Success measurement | HEART + Feature Metrics |
| Strategy communication | North Star + Vision |
Last Updated: January 2025