Feature Fatigue? How to Use RICE, MoSCoW, and More to Prioritize Product Roadmap

In partnership with

Hey there! 👋 

Welcome back to Rashdan’s Huddle, where we dive deep into the messy, yet rewarding world of product management. If you’re anything like me, you’ve probably faced the overwhelming flood of feature requests and competing priorities that make you wonder: How do I decide what to focus on?

This week, we’re tackling something that every product manager faces—feature fatigue—and how to overcome it using some tried-and-true prioritization techniques like RICE and MoSCoW. Stick around, because I’ll be sharing some personal tips and real-life examples that’ll make dealing with your roadmap a bit easier.

What is Feature Fatigue?

If you’ve been in product long enough, you know the feeling: A never-ending stream of feature requests from stakeholders, customers, and your team; each claiming theirs is the most important. Over time, this overload can lead to feature fatigue, where every idea starts looking urgent, and you lose clarity on what really matters.

The result? A bloated product roadmap with too many features in development, not enough focus on impact, and a team spread thin. Feature fatigue doesn’t just slow you down, it makes it harder to deliver meaningful value. So, how do you cut through the noise?

The Importance of Prioritization

Here’s the hard truth: not all features are created equal. Some will delight your users and drive growth, while others are just shiny distractions. Prioritization is how you separate the opportunities from the time-wasters.

Without a clear system for deciding what to build and when, you’re setting your team up for confusion and inefficiency. A good prioritization framework brings structure to the chaos, aligning your roadmap with business goals, user needs, and available resources.

Let’s jump into two of the most effective frameworks I strive to follow in my work: RICE and MoSCoW.

The RICE Method

First up is the RICE method. RICE stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort, and it’s a quantitative approach that helps you assign a score to each feature. The idea is simple: evaluate how much reach a feature will have, the impact it’ll create, how confident you are in the data, and how much effort it’ll take to execute. It’s a scoring model that helps you objectively compare different product initiatives based on these 4 factors:

• Reach: How many people will this feature or initiative affect within a given time period? This could be measured in terms of new users, active users, or specific customer segments impacted. For example, if a new feature will benefit 20% of your user base over the next quarter, its reach is substantial.

• Impact: On a scale (e.g., 0.25 to 3), how much will this feature move the needle? Will it increase customer satisfaction, reduce churn, or drive conversions? You can estimate the impact based on past data or insights from user research.

• Confidence: How confident are you in the numbers you’ve gathered for reach and impact? This is where data quality and gut feel come in. You might be 90% sure that a feature will boost engagement, or you might be working with limited information and have only 50% confidence. Assign a confidence score based on your data quality.

• Effort: Finally, calculate how much effort will be required to implement the feature. This is typically measured in "person-months" (how long it will take one team member to complete), and it can include everything from development time to design and QA.

The formula to calculate a RICE score is:
RICE Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort

Here’s a quick example: Let’s say you’re prioritizing two features—an improved onboarding flow and a new reporting tool. You estimate that the onboarding flow will reach 50% of new users with a high impact on retention (score of 3), and you’re 80% confident in that estimation. However, it will take 2 months to implement. Meanwhile, the reporting tool will reach only 10% of users, have moderate impact (score of 1), and take 3 months to develop.

The RICE scores might look like this:
- Onboarding Flow: (50 × 3 × 0.8) / 2 = 60
- Reporting Tool: (10 × 1 × 0.9) / 3 = 3

With the RICE method, you can see that the onboarding flow has a much higher score, making it a clear priority.

What I love about RICE is that it forces you to think beyond just “cool” ideas. It grounds your decision-making in numbers, ensuring you’re allocating resources to the features with the highest potential ROI.

The MoSCoW Method

Now, onto the MoSCoW method, another incredibly valuable tool when you’re balancing different needs and demands from stakeholders. MoSCoW stands for Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, and Won’t-have, and it’s a simpler, more qualitative approach to prioritizing features or requirements. Here’s what each category means:

• Must-have: These are non-negotiable features that are essential to the product. Without them, your product won’t function or deliver its core value. If you’re developing a banking app, for instance, user authentication would fall into the must-have category.

• Should-have: These are important features that add significant value, but the product can still function without them. However, you should aim to implement them as soon as you’ve covered the must-haves. In our banking app example, features like automated bill payments could be a should-have, useful, but not essential for the initial launch.

• Could-have: These are nice-to-haves features that would improve the user experience or provide additional convenience, but aren’t crucial. This could be something like a personalized dashboard for users in your banking app.

• Won’t-have: These are features you consciously decide not to include in the current roadmap, either because they don’t align with your immediate goals or require more resources than you can allocate right now. For example, integrating with third-party financial tools might be a won’t-have for your initial product version.

The MoSCoW method is ideal for ensuring that your team focuses on the features that deliver the most critical value, especially when you’re working with limited resources. One key advantage of MoSCoW is that it’s highly flexible, it helps you prioritize features at any stage of development, from the early planning stages to specific sprint decisions.

When I’ve used MoSCoW in practice, it’s often been during the early phases of roadmap planning or when collaborating with non-technical stakeholders who might not need to see granular data. It’s a great framework for communicating trade-offs and aligning everyone around shared priorities.

MoSCoW is especially useful when resources are tight, and you need to prioritize ruthlessly.

When to Use RICE vs. MoSCoW

Now, you might be wondering: When do I use RICE versus MoSCoW?

From my experience, RICE is best when you have clear data to back up your decisions.Think conversion rates, user engagement metrics, or any quantifiable impact. It’s perfect for feature prioritization in the later stages of a project when you need to validate ideas and maximize ROI.

On the other hand, MoSCoW shines when you’re in the early stages of planning a roadmap or dealing with broader strategic decisions. It helps you explore more subjective territory, especially when you’re dealing with competing voices from stakeholders.

That said, there’s no hard and fast rule. I’ve often used both frameworks simultaneously, starting with MoSCoW for strategic direction and then using RICE to finalize what gets into the sprint.

Additional Prioritization Techniques

While RICE and MoSCoW are highly effective methods, they’re not the only ones out there. If you’re looking to mix things up, consider exploring the Kano Model (which categorizes features based on customer satisfaction) or the Value vs. Effort Matrix (which is great for balancing quick wins with longer-term projects).

The key is to experiment with different methods and find what works best for your team and product stage. Prioritization isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution.

Resources

• How to Prioritize Your Product Roadmap

• How To Prioritise Features

• What is the RICE Scoring Model?

• What is MoSCoW Prioritization Method? 

Feature fatigue is real, but it doesn’t have to derail your product. By using frameworks like RICE and MoSCoW, you can bring clarity and focus to your roadmap, ensuring that your team is always working on the features that will make the biggest impact.

The next time you feel overwhelmed by competing priorities, take a step back, apply one of these techniques, and watch the chaos start to clear up.

Until next time, keep building awesome products.

Try the internet’s easiest File API

Tired of spending hours setting up file management systems? Pinata’s File API makes it effortless. With simple integration, you can add file uploads and retrieval to your app in minutes, allowing you to focus on building features instead of wasting time on unnecessary configurations. Our API provides fast, secure, and scalable file management without the hassle of maintaining infrastructure.

Try it now!