Week 7 · learning day 5
Feature prioritisation
Understanding Consumer Preferences · 60–90 minutes
Today’s outcomes
- Explain feature prioritisation in the context of understanding consumer preferences.
- Decide a product decision using the source outcome rather than intuition alone.
- Produce a reusable section of a kano priority table.
Source trace
W07-O01Identify the important attributes/features in the product/services through explicit response methods.
Core lesson
Make the choice inspectable
Feature prioritisation matters when it changes a real allocation of attention, money, time, or delivery capacity. Translate preference evidence into an explicit feature trade-off.
Start by naming the decision and the uncertainty around it. Separate evidence from assumptions, compare at least one alternative, and state what would make you revise the choice.
The source outcome for today is: Identify the important attributes/features in the product/services through explicit response methods.
What decision will feature prioritisation improve, what evidence is sufficient for that decision, and what is the cost of being wrong?
Worked example
Feature prioritisation in practice
For a weekday meal plan for office commuters, the product manager must decide a choice about feature prioritisation. The team records the target user and outcome, the evidence currently available, the strongest alternative, and the next reversible test. The recommendation is written as a choice with a reason—not as a list of features.
Do the work · 20 minutes
Turn the idea into a decision
- Choose a product you know and write the specific decision that feature prioritisation should support.
- List two pieces of evidence, two assumptions, and one credible alternative.
- Make a recommendation in three sentences and add one condition that would change it.
Save to your portfolio
A Kano priority table — section: Feature prioritisation
Knowledge check
Answer before opening
What is the decision at the centre of feature prioritisation?
A good answer names an accountable choice, not merely an activity or output.
How should evidence and assumptions be separated?
Label observed facts, interpretations, and untested beliefs explicitly so the next learning step is visible.
What makes the recommendation revisable?
It includes a trigger, threshold, or new evidence that would justify changing course.
What should the portfolio artefact communicate?
The context, considered alternatives, chosen direction, rationale, evidence, and remaining risk.
Spaced review
Reconnect the learning
Reflection