User research uncovers a wealth of insights—pain points, preferences, behaviors—that can steer your design decisions toward creating products that truly resonate. However, with so many findings at your disposal, one of the biggest challenges is deciding which problems to tackle first or which solutions to develop first!
Prioritizing effectively can make the difference between a successful product and one that misses the mark. Let’s explore some of the most effective methods to prioritize problems discovered in user research and their solutions.
1. Impact vs. Effort Matrix
One of the most popular and straightforward prioritization tools is the Impact vs. Effort Matrix. This method helps you evaluate each problem based on the potential impact it has on the user experience and the effort required to fix it.
How It Works:
High Impact, Low Effort: These are your quick wins. Addressing these issues can significantly enhance user satisfaction with minimal resource investment.
High Impact, High Effort: These are major projects that can transform the user experience but require substantial time and resources.
Low Impact, Low Effort: These are minor improvements that can be tackled when resources are available.
Low Impact, High Effort: These are often candidates for elimination as they offer little benefit relative to the effort required.
Both designers and developers need to be involved. The more experienced they are, the higher the likelihood they can size the effort quickly.
2. The Kano Model
The Kano Model is a powerful tool for categorizing user needs based on their ability to satisfy or delight users.
Categories:
Must-Haves: Basic features that users expect. Their absence can cause dissatisfaction.
Performance Needs: Features that improve user satisfaction proportionally to their performance.
Delighters: Unexpected features that can significantly enhance user satisfaction but aren’t expected.
During a redesign of a productivity app, user research revealed that while users appreciated advanced customization options (performance needs), they were thrilled by the addition of a unique motivational feature—a daily inspirational quote.
According to the Kano Model, this feature was a delighter, providing unexpected joy without being a core requirement. Its implementation not only delighted users but also became a unique selling point for the app.
3. RICE Framework
The RICE Framework stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort. It’s a more quantitative approach that helps prioritize based on measurable factors.
Components:
Reach: How many users will be affected by the solution within a given timeframe.
Impact: The degree to which the solution will affect each user.
Confidence: How certain you are about your estimates for reach and impact.
Effort: The total amount of work required to implement the solution.
Prioritizing features based on their RICE score led to increased user engagement and satisfaction.
4. MoSCoW Method
The MoSCoW Method categorizes tasks into Must-Have, Should-Have, Could-Have, and Won’t-Have. It’s particularly useful for managing scope and setting clear priorities.
Categories:
Must-Have: Essential features without which the product would fail.
Should-Have: Important but not critical; can be included if time and resources permit.
Could-Have: Desirable features that add value but are not necessary.
Won’t-Have: Features that are agreed to be excluded for the current timeframe.
For example, for a health tracking app, the ability to track basic metrics like steps and calories would be Must-Haves, while integration with wearable devices would be Should-Haves. Advanced analytics and social sharing features would be Could-Haves.
5. User Value vs. Business Value
Balancing User Value with Business Value ensures that prioritization aligns both with user needs and organizational goals.
Considerations:
User Value: Enhancements that directly improve the user experience, satisfaction, and loyalty.
Business Value: Features that drive revenue, reduce costs, or align with strategic objectives.
For instance, personalized recommendations drive user value. If these recommendations also drive premium subscriptions then the feature scores high on both dimensions.
By prioritizing features that scored high in both categories, we created a product that delighted users while also driving subscription growth and revenue.
6. Severity Ratings
Severity Ratings assess the seriousness of each problem based on its impact on the user and the frequency of occurrence.
Components:
Severity: How much the problem hinders the user.
Frequency: How often the problem occurs.
This is particularly useful for usability testing results. Problems that are severe and frequent are critical. Addressing this critical issue first significantly improves the overall usability of the apps/experiences.
Final Thoughts
Prioritizing problems uncovered in user research is a critical step in the UX design process. By employing the methods above, we can (attempt to) systematically determine which issues to address first!