What is MoSCoW Prioritization? A Complete Guide to Using This Essential Requirements Prioritization Method
MoSCoW prioritization is a crucial technique in agile project management and software development that helps teams prioritize requirements and initiatives. With MoSCoW, you can classify project needs into categories to focus on the most critical features first.
In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explain what MoSCoW is, why it’s useful, and how to run a MoSCoW analysis for your next project. You’ll learn the MoSCoW categories, rules, and best practices so you can start prioritizing requirements effectively.
Let’s get started!
What Is MoSCoW Prioritization?
MoSCoW is an acronym that stands for:
Must have
Should have
Could have
Won't have (for now)
It is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements, features, or initiatives based on how critical they are to a project.
The MoSCoW method was created in the early 1990s by Dai Clegg, a software development expert working at Oracle. It is often used in agile environments to prioritize user stories or requirements for the next product release or iteration.
MoSCoW helps teams:
Clarify and agree on the most important requirements
Avoid scope creep by deferring less critical features
Release a minimum viable product earlier
Manage stakeholders' expectations
Allocate resources and effort more effectively
It is a simple yet effective prioritization framework to determine what is absolutely essential vs. what is less critical or could wait until later.
The four MoSCoW categories allow you to bucket requirements based on must-have, should-have, could-have, and won’t have (for now). We’ll explore what each of these mean.
Must Have Requirements
Items labeled as Must Have are critical requirements without which your project cannot function or be released.
These are absolute must-have items you need to deliver in the current release. They are non-negotiable.
For example:
Key features that define the core value proposition
Major functionality that users expect
Requirements driven by law, compliance or security
Integration with other core systems
You need to have 100% of your Must Have requirements completed before you can consider the project or product ready for release.
Should Have Requirements
Should Have requirements are important but not absolutely critical.
These would deliver significant value and you should try to include them if possible. But if you had to, you could release without these.
Examples:
Nice-to-have features that aren’t core to the product
Functional enhancements that improve the user experience
Lower-priority integrations
Useful reports/analytics that provide additional insights
Should Have requirements make your solution better, but they are lower priority than Must Haves. These get scheduled if there is time, budget, and resources available.
Could Have Requirements
Could Have requirements are desirable but not urgent. These features could improve the product in the future but they can wait until later.
Could Haves may include:
New features that can be postponed to a future release
Functionality for a secondary persona or edge use case
Enhancements that are further down the roadmap
Integrations that expand the ecosystem but aren’t essential yet
Could Haves represent a wish list of items you’d like to have eventually but won’t schedule for the current release.
Won't Have For Now
Won't Have For Now, also known as Would Have, captures requirements or ideas you've decided to exclude from scope for the foreseeable future.
These may be:
Nice-to-have features with no clear business value
Gold-plating beyond the core scope
Things stakeholders requested but you will not address now
Won’t Haves are not on the roadmap. You have no plans to ever work on these - at least not in the current planning horizon.
Clearly documenting Won’t Haves reduces scope creep and temptation to later add these “must have” items back in.
Benefits of Using the MoSCoW Method
There are several key benefits that make MoSCoW prioritization so useful:
Provides a shared framework - Having standard MoSCoW categories helps teams align on priorities and urgency.
Offers granular separation - Four levels allow more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization.
Limits scope creep - Locking down Won’t Haves makes de-scoping easier.
Focuses effort - Ensures you deliver the vital 20% (Must Haves) before the trivial 80% (nice-to-haves).
Promotes MVP releases - Helps you launch the minimum viable product faster.
Manages stakeholders - Grounds discussions in clear priority tiers that justify what is in/out of scope.
Enables agility - If priorities shift, you can re-categorize remaining requirements.
Simple and flexible - Quick to explain but can adapt for multiple uses.
When Should You Use the MoSCoW Method?
MoSCoW prioritization helps in several common situations:
Prioritizing requirements for a new product or project
Planning features for the next release or iteration
Clarifying which scope items are fixed vs. negotiable
Resolving conflicts between stakeholders wanting different features
Deciding what goes into an MVP vs. future releases
Reducing scope creep and sticking to critical path items
Explaining the “why” behind what is in vs. out of scope
Allocating resources and scheduling development
It is most helpful early in a project to align stakeholders and agree on the release criteria. But MoSCoW can also be used iteratively if priorities change.
How to Conduct a MoSCoW Analysis
Here is an overview of how to run a MoSCoW analysis:
1. Gather Requirements
First, collect all potential requirements for the product or project. Common ways to gather needs include:
User research
Stakeholder interviews
Existing backlogs
Support tickets
Feedback and requests
Include needs from all key user personas and stakeholder groups.
2. Categorize Requirements
Next, take each requirement and assign it to one of the four MoSCoW buckets.
Must Have: Critical requirements without which you cannot launch. The core 20%.
Should Have: Important but lower priority. Nice-to-haves.
Could Have: Desirable but can wait til later.
Won’t Have: Out of scope.
You can conduct this quickly in a workshop setting or over several iterative passes.
3. Finalize and Prioritize Buckets
Review the categorization and confirm the contents of each MoSCoW bucket.
Then prioritize within each bucket - what is the internal order of urgency?
4. Estimate and Schedule
For each prioritized bucket, estimate level of effort.
Then schedule Must Haves first, Should Haves if there is capacity, etc.
5. Communicate and Execute
Communicate the MoSCoW priorities and release plan to stakeholders.
Then build - stay laser-focused on delivering the Must Haves first!
Throughout execution, refer back to MoSCoW often to avoid scope creep. Only modify categories if genuine priority shifts occur.
10 Best Practices for Using the MoSCoW Method
Follow these tips when running a MoSCoW analysis:
Include all stakeholders - Don’t allow one group to dominate priorities. Get broad input.
Clarify criteria first - Agree on principles for assigning categories - ROI, risk, dependencies.
Start with must haves - Get alignment on the minimum viable product first.
Limit must have count - Be disciplined. If everything is a must have, nothing is.
Use relative prioritization - Compare items against each other to assign categories.
Update iteratively - Expect multiple passes before finalizing categories.
Watch for conflicts - Hash out tension points through open discussion.
Communicate rules - Ensure everyone understands the meaning behind each bucket.
Limit won’t haves - Throw in these out of scope items sparingly.
Revisit and reassess - Requirements always change. Expect to re-MoSCoW periodically.
Common Questions and Criticism of the MoSCoW Method
Here are some frequent questions that arise with MoSCoW prioritization:
Isn’t this just high/medium/low prioritization?
No - having four buckets allows more granularity than three or fewer levels. And the category names provide more meaning.
Doesn’t every stakeholder just make their own requirements Must Have?
Good facilitation is key. Set clear criteria for categories and force ranking across items.
What if priorities change mid-project?
That’s expected. Rerun MoSCoW as needed - just don't allow constant scope creep.
How do you manage conflicting priorities?
Have open debate. Achieve consensus based on objective criteria, not authority.
Isn’t this a rigid waterfall approach?
Not at all - MoSCoW is designed for agile projects. Categorize remaining work in each iteration.
How do you budget/estimate if priorities still shifting?
Estimate buckets separately. Plan for must-haves first, should-haves if possible.
What if we need to deliver something not categorized?
Rare, but if genuinely critical new work emerges, plan it after the must-haves.
When Not to Use the MoSCoW Method
MoSCoW prioritization is not a silver bullet solution. Cases where it may not be the best fit:
Requirements are strictly fixed/dictated
Priorities set in stone by executives/sponsor
Limited flexibility around what is delivered when
Extremely small number of requirements
Organization lacks an agile mindset
Forcing MoSCoW in these situations may lead to frustration. Focus on communication over process.
MoSCoW Alternatives and Variations
If MoSCoW doesn’t suit your needs, consider these alternatives:
Kano model - Categorizes requirements based on customer satisfaction
Weighted scoring - Ranks requirements on multiple factors using point system
Theme screening - Grouping requirements by theme or objective
Value vs. Effort prioritization - Plotting requirements on a matrix
Minimal Marketable Release (MMR) - Identifying the absolute minimum release
Buy a Feature - Allocating fictional budget against requirements
Dot voting - Literally placing dot stickers next to favorites
Many teams will also modify or adapt MoSCoW itself, for example:
Expanding to 5-6 levels for more granularity
Using different category names
Including numeric scores or percentages
Introducing additional prioritization dimensions like cost, risk, or value
The best option depends on your specific project and needs. The core principles of separating must-haves from nice-to-haves remain effective in any variation.
Tools for Managing MoSCoW Prioritization
To make MoSCoW prioritization easier, consider using these handy tools:
Trello - Kanban boards to visualize MoSCoW status
Jira - Built-in MoSCoW priority field
Aha! - Roadmapping tool with MoSCoW categories
ProductPlan - Prioritization with MoSCoW buckets
PitStop - Workshop facilitation for MoSCoW and more
Miro - Virtual whiteboards for MoSCoW
Milanote - Online sticky notes ideal for MoSCoW
Google Sheets - Simple MoSCoW tracking spreadsheet
Look for tools that allow flexible fields to represent the four prioritization levels. Visibility into the different categories helps enforce MoSCoW discipline.
MoSCoW Prioritization Templates
For those who prefer more structured templates, here are some handy MoSCoW resources:
Reuse these templates for your own MoSCoW workshops to get started quickly. Tweak them as needed to match your process.
Sample MoSCoW Prioritization
To make this more concrete, here is an example MoSCoW analysis for prioritizing requirements for a new project management software product:
Must Have
Task management
Kanban boards
Mobile app
Due dates
Reporting
User management
Native integrations
Should Have
Custom fields
Time tracking
Portfolio hierarchy
Resource management
Custom workflows
Could Have
Auto scheduling
Milestone dependencies
API integrations
Timesheets
Project templates
Won't Have (for now)
Resource leveling
Financials
Doc management
Resource pooling
Skills management
This illuminates the core functionality required to launch the MVP (Must Have) versus optional features that, while nice to have, are lower priority and can wait (Should Have, Could Have).
Explicitly calling out won’t have items also reduces scope creep by acknowledging certain requests that are clearly out of scope.
Recap of MoSCoW Prioritization
Let’s recap what we’ve learned:
MoSCoW is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements or initiatives into Must, Should, Could, and Won’t Have buckets.
It was created for agile software projects but can be used widely for any prioritization.
MoSCoW helps teams align on MVP scope, prevent scope creep, and sequence delivery of the most important work first.
Requirements are assigned to the four categories based on importance and urgency relative to other needs.
Must Haves are critical and non-negotiable. Should Haves are high value but lower priority. Could Haves are nice-to-haves for later. Won’t Haves are out of scope.
MoSCoW offers more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization and limits scope creep through Won’t Haves.
Use MoSCoW early in a project to get consensus on priorities, then estimate and schedule requirements accordingly.
Revisit and re-MoSCoW regularly as priorities inevitably change.
Prioritizing effectively is a core agile competency. By leveraging the simple yet powerful MoSCoW framework, you can build shared alignment around MVP and release planning - enabling your team to focus efforts on what matters most to drive success.
What is MoSCoW Prioritization? A Complete Guide to Using This Essential Requirements Prioritization Method
MoSCoW prioritization is a crucial technique in agile project management and software development that helps teams prioritize requirements and initiatives. With MoSCoW, you can classify project needs into categories to focus on the most critical features first.
In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explain what MoSCoW is, why it’s useful, and how to run a MoSCoW analysis for your next project. You’ll learn the MoSCoW categories, rules, and best practices so you can start prioritizing requirements effectively.
Let’s get started!
What Is MoSCoW Prioritization?
MoSCoW is an acronym that stands for:
Must have
Should have
Could have
Won't have (for now)
It is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements, features, or initiatives based on how critical they are to a project.
The MoSCoW method was created in the early 1990s by Dai Clegg, a software development expert working at Oracle. It is often used in agile environments to prioritize user stories or requirements for the next product release or iteration.
MoSCoW helps teams:
Clarify and agree on the most important requirements
Avoid scope creep by deferring less critical features
Release a minimum viable product earlier
Manage stakeholders' expectations
Allocate resources and effort more effectively
It is a simple yet effective prioritization framework to determine what is absolutely essential vs. what is less critical or could wait until later.
The four MoSCoW categories allow you to bucket requirements based on must-have, should-have, could-have, and won’t have (for now). We’ll explore what each of these mean.
Must Have Requirements
Items labeled as Must Have are critical requirements without which your project cannot function or be released.
These are absolute must-have items you need to deliver in the current release. They are non-negotiable.
For example:
Key features that define the core value proposition
Major functionality that users expect
Requirements driven by law, compliance or security
Integration with other core systems
You need to have 100% of your Must Have requirements completed before you can consider the project or product ready for release.
Should Have Requirements
Should Have requirements are important but not absolutely critical.
These would deliver significant value and you should try to include them if possible. But if you had to, you could release without these.
Examples:
Nice-to-have features that aren’t core to the product
Functional enhancements that improve the user experience
Lower-priority integrations
Useful reports/analytics that provide additional insights
Should Have requirements make your solution better, but they are lower priority than Must Haves. These get scheduled if there is time, budget, and resources available.
Could Have Requirements
Could Have requirements are desirable but not urgent. These features could improve the product in the future but they can wait until later.
Could Haves may include:
New features that can be postponed to a future release
Functionality for a secondary persona or edge use case
Enhancements that are further down the roadmap
Integrations that expand the ecosystem but aren’t essential yet
Could Haves represent a wish list of items you’d like to have eventually but won’t schedule for the current release.
Won't Have For Now
Won't Have For Now, also known as Would Have, captures requirements or ideas you've decided to exclude from scope for the foreseeable future.
These may be:
Nice-to-have features with no clear business value
Gold-plating beyond the core scope
Things stakeholders requested but you will not address now
Won’t Haves are not on the roadmap. You have no plans to ever work on these - at least not in the current planning horizon.
Clearly documenting Won’t Haves reduces scope creep and temptation to later add these “must have” items back in.
Benefits of Using the MoSCoW Method
There are several key benefits that make MoSCoW prioritization so useful:
Provides a shared framework - Having standard MoSCoW categories helps teams align on priorities and urgency.
Offers granular separation - Four levels allow more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization.
Limits scope creep - Locking down Won’t Haves makes de-scoping easier.
Focuses effort - Ensures you deliver the vital 20% (Must Haves) before the trivial 80% (nice-to-haves).
Promotes MVP releases - Helps you launch the minimum viable product faster.
Manages stakeholders - Grounds discussions in clear priority tiers that justify what is in/out of scope.
Enables agility - If priorities shift, you can re-categorize remaining requirements.
Simple and flexible - Quick to explain but can adapt for multiple uses.
When Should You Use the MoSCoW Method?
MoSCoW prioritization helps in several common situations:
Prioritizing requirements for a new product or project
Planning features for the next release or iteration
Clarifying which scope items are fixed vs. negotiable
Resolving conflicts between stakeholders wanting different features
Deciding what goes into an MVP vs. future releases
Reducing scope creep and sticking to critical path items
Explaining the “why” behind what is in vs. out of scope
Allocating resources and scheduling development
It is most helpful early in a project to align stakeholders and agree on the release criteria. But MoSCoW can also be used iteratively if priorities change.
How to Conduct a MoSCoW Analysis
Here is an overview of how to run a MoSCoW analysis:
1. Gather Requirements
First, collect all potential requirements for the product or project. Common ways to gather needs include:
User research
Stakeholder interviews
Existing backlogs
Support tickets
Feedback and requests
Include needs from all key user personas and stakeholder groups.
2. Categorize Requirements
Next, take each requirement and assign it to one of the four MoSCoW buckets.
Must Have: Critical requirements without which you cannot launch. The core 20%.
Should Have: Important but lower priority. Nice-to-haves.
Could Have: Desirable but can wait til later.
Won’t Have: Out of scope.
You can conduct this quickly in a workshop setting or over several iterative passes.
3. Finalize and Prioritize Buckets
Review the categorization and confirm the contents of each MoSCoW bucket.
Then prioritize within each bucket - what is the internal order of urgency?
4. Estimate and Schedule
For each prioritized bucket, estimate level of effort.
Then schedule Must Haves first, Should Haves if there is capacity, etc.
5. Communicate and Execute
Communicate the MoSCoW priorities and release plan to stakeholders.
Then build - stay laser-focused on delivering the Must Haves first!
Throughout execution, refer back to MoSCoW often to avoid scope creep. Only modify categories if genuine priority shifts occur.
10 Best Practices for Using the MoSCoW Method
Follow these tips when running a MoSCoW analysis:
Include all stakeholders - Don’t allow one group to dominate priorities. Get broad input.
Clarify criteria first - Agree on principles for assigning categories - ROI, risk, dependencies.
Start with must haves - Get alignment on the minimum viable product first.
Limit must have count - Be disciplined. If everything is a must have, nothing is.
Use relative prioritization - Compare items against each other to assign categories.
Update iteratively - Expect multiple passes before finalizing categories.
Watch for conflicts - Hash out tension points through open discussion.
Communicate rules - Ensure everyone understands the meaning behind each bucket.
Limit won’t haves - Throw in these out of scope items sparingly.
Revisit and reassess - Requirements always change. Expect to re-MoSCoW periodically.
Common Questions and Criticism of the MoSCoW Method
Here are some frequent questions that arise with MoSCoW prioritization:
Isn’t this just high/medium/low prioritization?
No - having four buckets allows more granularity than three or fewer levels. And the category names provide more meaning.
Doesn’t every stakeholder just make their own requirements Must Have?
Good facilitation is key. Set clear criteria for categories and force ranking across items.
What if priorities change mid-project?
That’s expected. Rerun MoSCoW as needed - just don't allow constant scope creep.
How do you manage conflicting priorities?
Have open debate. Achieve consensus based on objective criteria, not authority.
Isn’t this a rigid waterfall approach?
Not at all - MoSCoW is designed for agile projects. Categorize remaining work in each iteration.
How do you budget/estimate if priorities still shifting?
Estimate buckets separately. Plan for must-haves first, should-haves if possible.
What if we need to deliver something not categorized?
Rare, but if genuinely critical new work emerges, plan it after the must-haves.
When Not to Use the MoSCoW Method
MoSCoW prioritization is not a silver bullet solution. Cases where it may not be the best fit:
Requirements are strictly fixed/dictated
Priorities set in stone by executives/sponsor
Limited flexibility around what is delivered when
Extremely small number of requirements
Organization lacks an agile mindset
Forcing MoSCoW in these situations may lead to frustration. Focus on communication over process.
MoSCoW Alternatives and Variations
If MoSCoW doesn’t suit your needs, consider these alternatives:
Kano model - Categorizes requirements based on customer satisfaction
Weighted scoring - Ranks requirements on multiple factors using point system
Theme screening - Grouping requirements by theme or objective
Value vs. Effort prioritization - Plotting requirements on a matrix
Minimal Marketable Release (MMR) - Identifying the absolute minimum release
Buy a Feature - Allocating fictional budget against requirements
Dot voting - Literally placing dot stickers next to favorites
Many teams will also modify or adapt MoSCoW itself, for example:
Expanding to 5-6 levels for more granularity
Using different category names
Including numeric scores or percentages
Introducing additional prioritization dimensions like cost, risk, or value
The best option depends on your specific project and needs. The core principles of separating must-haves from nice-to-haves remain effective in any variation.
Tools for Managing MoSCoW Prioritization
To make MoSCoW prioritization easier, consider using these handy tools:
Trello - Kanban boards to visualize MoSCoW status
Jira - Built-in MoSCoW priority field
Aha! - Roadmapping tool with MoSCoW categories
ProductPlan - Prioritization with MoSCoW buckets
PitStop - Workshop facilitation for MoSCoW and more
Miro - Virtual whiteboards for MoSCoW
Milanote - Online sticky notes ideal for MoSCoW
Google Sheets - Simple MoSCoW tracking spreadsheet
Look for tools that allow flexible fields to represent the four prioritization levels. Visibility into the different categories helps enforce MoSCoW discipline.
MoSCoW Prioritization Templates
For those who prefer more structured templates, here are some handy MoSCoW resources:
Reuse these templates for your own MoSCoW workshops to get started quickly. Tweak them as needed to match your process.
Sample MoSCoW Prioritization
To make this more concrete, here is an example MoSCoW analysis for prioritizing requirements for a new project management software product:
Must Have
Task management
Kanban boards
Mobile app
Due dates
Reporting
User management
Native integrations
Should Have
Custom fields
Time tracking
Portfolio hierarchy
Resource management
Custom workflows
Could Have
Auto scheduling
Milestone dependencies
API integrations
Timesheets
Project templates
Won't Have (for now)
Resource leveling
Financials
Doc management
Resource pooling
Skills management
This illuminates the core functionality required to launch the MVP (Must Have) versus optional features that, while nice to have, are lower priority and can wait (Should Have, Could Have).
Explicitly calling out won’t have items also reduces scope creep by acknowledging certain requests that are clearly out of scope.
Recap of MoSCoW Prioritization
Let’s recap what we’ve learned:
MoSCoW is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements or initiatives into Must, Should, Could, and Won’t Have buckets.
It was created for agile software projects but can be used widely for any prioritization.
MoSCoW helps teams align on MVP scope, prevent scope creep, and sequence delivery of the most important work first.
Requirements are assigned to the four categories based on importance and urgency relative to other needs.
Must Haves are critical and non-negotiable. Should Haves are high value but lower priority. Could Haves are nice-to-haves for later. Won’t Haves are out of scope.
MoSCoW offers more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization and limits scope creep through Won’t Haves.
Use MoSCoW early in a project to get consensus on priorities, then estimate and schedule requirements accordingly.
Revisit and re-MoSCoW regularly as priorities inevitably change.
Prioritizing effectively is a core agile competency. By leveraging the simple yet powerful MoSCoW framework, you can build shared alignment around MVP and release planning - enabling your team to focus efforts on what matters most to drive success.
What is MoSCoW Prioritization? A Complete Guide to Using This Essential Requirements Prioritization Method
MoSCoW prioritization is a crucial technique in agile project management and software development that helps teams prioritize requirements and initiatives. With MoSCoW, you can classify project needs into categories to focus on the most critical features first.
In this comprehensive guide, we’ll explain what MoSCoW is, why it’s useful, and how to run a MoSCoW analysis for your next project. You’ll learn the MoSCoW categories, rules, and best practices so you can start prioritizing requirements effectively.
Let’s get started!
What Is MoSCoW Prioritization?
MoSCoW is an acronym that stands for:
Must have
Should have
Could have
Won't have (for now)
It is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements, features, or initiatives based on how critical they are to a project.
The MoSCoW method was created in the early 1990s by Dai Clegg, a software development expert working at Oracle. It is often used in agile environments to prioritize user stories or requirements for the next product release or iteration.
MoSCoW helps teams:
Clarify and agree on the most important requirements
Avoid scope creep by deferring less critical features
Release a minimum viable product earlier
Manage stakeholders' expectations
Allocate resources and effort more effectively
It is a simple yet effective prioritization framework to determine what is absolutely essential vs. what is less critical or could wait until later.
The four MoSCoW categories allow you to bucket requirements based on must-have, should-have, could-have, and won’t have (for now). We’ll explore what each of these mean.
Must Have Requirements
Items labeled as Must Have are critical requirements without which your project cannot function or be released.
These are absolute must-have items you need to deliver in the current release. They are non-negotiable.
For example:
Key features that define the core value proposition
Major functionality that users expect
Requirements driven by law, compliance or security
Integration with other core systems
You need to have 100% of your Must Have requirements completed before you can consider the project or product ready for release.
Should Have Requirements
Should Have requirements are important but not absolutely critical.
These would deliver significant value and you should try to include them if possible. But if you had to, you could release without these.
Examples:
Nice-to-have features that aren’t core to the product
Functional enhancements that improve the user experience
Lower-priority integrations
Useful reports/analytics that provide additional insights
Should Have requirements make your solution better, but they are lower priority than Must Haves. These get scheduled if there is time, budget, and resources available.
Could Have Requirements
Could Have requirements are desirable but not urgent. These features could improve the product in the future but they can wait until later.
Could Haves may include:
New features that can be postponed to a future release
Functionality for a secondary persona or edge use case
Enhancements that are further down the roadmap
Integrations that expand the ecosystem but aren’t essential yet
Could Haves represent a wish list of items you’d like to have eventually but won’t schedule for the current release.
Won't Have For Now
Won't Have For Now, also known as Would Have, captures requirements or ideas you've decided to exclude from scope for the foreseeable future.
These may be:
Nice-to-have features with no clear business value
Gold-plating beyond the core scope
Things stakeholders requested but you will not address now
Won’t Haves are not on the roadmap. You have no plans to ever work on these - at least not in the current planning horizon.
Clearly documenting Won’t Haves reduces scope creep and temptation to later add these “must have” items back in.
Benefits of Using the MoSCoW Method
There are several key benefits that make MoSCoW prioritization so useful:
Provides a shared framework - Having standard MoSCoW categories helps teams align on priorities and urgency.
Offers granular separation - Four levels allow more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization.
Limits scope creep - Locking down Won’t Haves makes de-scoping easier.
Focuses effort - Ensures you deliver the vital 20% (Must Haves) before the trivial 80% (nice-to-haves).
Promotes MVP releases - Helps you launch the minimum viable product faster.
Manages stakeholders - Grounds discussions in clear priority tiers that justify what is in/out of scope.
Enables agility - If priorities shift, you can re-categorize remaining requirements.
Simple and flexible - Quick to explain but can adapt for multiple uses.
When Should You Use the MoSCoW Method?
MoSCoW prioritization helps in several common situations:
Prioritizing requirements for a new product or project
Planning features for the next release or iteration
Clarifying which scope items are fixed vs. negotiable
Resolving conflicts between stakeholders wanting different features
Deciding what goes into an MVP vs. future releases
Reducing scope creep and sticking to critical path items
Explaining the “why” behind what is in vs. out of scope
Allocating resources and scheduling development
It is most helpful early in a project to align stakeholders and agree on the release criteria. But MoSCoW can also be used iteratively if priorities change.
How to Conduct a MoSCoW Analysis
Here is an overview of how to run a MoSCoW analysis:
1. Gather Requirements
First, collect all potential requirements for the product or project. Common ways to gather needs include:
User research
Stakeholder interviews
Existing backlogs
Support tickets
Feedback and requests
Include needs from all key user personas and stakeholder groups.
2. Categorize Requirements
Next, take each requirement and assign it to one of the four MoSCoW buckets.
Must Have: Critical requirements without which you cannot launch. The core 20%.
Should Have: Important but lower priority. Nice-to-haves.
Could Have: Desirable but can wait til later.
Won’t Have: Out of scope.
You can conduct this quickly in a workshop setting or over several iterative passes.
3. Finalize and Prioritize Buckets
Review the categorization and confirm the contents of each MoSCoW bucket.
Then prioritize within each bucket - what is the internal order of urgency?
4. Estimate and Schedule
For each prioritized bucket, estimate level of effort.
Then schedule Must Haves first, Should Haves if there is capacity, etc.
5. Communicate and Execute
Communicate the MoSCoW priorities and release plan to stakeholders.
Then build - stay laser-focused on delivering the Must Haves first!
Throughout execution, refer back to MoSCoW often to avoid scope creep. Only modify categories if genuine priority shifts occur.
10 Best Practices for Using the MoSCoW Method
Follow these tips when running a MoSCoW analysis:
Include all stakeholders - Don’t allow one group to dominate priorities. Get broad input.
Clarify criteria first - Agree on principles for assigning categories - ROI, risk, dependencies.
Start with must haves - Get alignment on the minimum viable product first.
Limit must have count - Be disciplined. If everything is a must have, nothing is.
Use relative prioritization - Compare items against each other to assign categories.
Update iteratively - Expect multiple passes before finalizing categories.
Watch for conflicts - Hash out tension points through open discussion.
Communicate rules - Ensure everyone understands the meaning behind each bucket.
Limit won’t haves - Throw in these out of scope items sparingly.
Revisit and reassess - Requirements always change. Expect to re-MoSCoW periodically.
Common Questions and Criticism of the MoSCoW Method
Here are some frequent questions that arise with MoSCoW prioritization:
Isn’t this just high/medium/low prioritization?
No - having four buckets allows more granularity than three or fewer levels. And the category names provide more meaning.
Doesn’t every stakeholder just make their own requirements Must Have?
Good facilitation is key. Set clear criteria for categories and force ranking across items.
What if priorities change mid-project?
That’s expected. Rerun MoSCoW as needed - just don't allow constant scope creep.
How do you manage conflicting priorities?
Have open debate. Achieve consensus based on objective criteria, not authority.
Isn’t this a rigid waterfall approach?
Not at all - MoSCoW is designed for agile projects. Categorize remaining work in each iteration.
How do you budget/estimate if priorities still shifting?
Estimate buckets separately. Plan for must-haves first, should-haves if possible.
What if we need to deliver something not categorized?
Rare, but if genuinely critical new work emerges, plan it after the must-haves.
When Not to Use the MoSCoW Method
MoSCoW prioritization is not a silver bullet solution. Cases where it may not be the best fit:
Requirements are strictly fixed/dictated
Priorities set in stone by executives/sponsor
Limited flexibility around what is delivered when
Extremely small number of requirements
Organization lacks an agile mindset
Forcing MoSCoW in these situations may lead to frustration. Focus on communication over process.
MoSCoW Alternatives and Variations
If MoSCoW doesn’t suit your needs, consider these alternatives:
Kano model - Categorizes requirements based on customer satisfaction
Weighted scoring - Ranks requirements on multiple factors using point system
Theme screening - Grouping requirements by theme or objective
Value vs. Effort prioritization - Plotting requirements on a matrix
Minimal Marketable Release (MMR) - Identifying the absolute minimum release
Buy a Feature - Allocating fictional budget against requirements
Dot voting - Literally placing dot stickers next to favorites
Many teams will also modify or adapt MoSCoW itself, for example:
Expanding to 5-6 levels for more granularity
Using different category names
Including numeric scores or percentages
Introducing additional prioritization dimensions like cost, risk, or value
The best option depends on your specific project and needs. The core principles of separating must-haves from nice-to-haves remain effective in any variation.
Tools for Managing MoSCoW Prioritization
To make MoSCoW prioritization easier, consider using these handy tools:
Trello - Kanban boards to visualize MoSCoW status
Jira - Built-in MoSCoW priority field
Aha! - Roadmapping tool with MoSCoW categories
ProductPlan - Prioritization with MoSCoW buckets
PitStop - Workshop facilitation for MoSCoW and more
Miro - Virtual whiteboards for MoSCoW
Milanote - Online sticky notes ideal for MoSCoW
Google Sheets - Simple MoSCoW tracking spreadsheet
Look for tools that allow flexible fields to represent the four prioritization levels. Visibility into the different categories helps enforce MoSCoW discipline.
MoSCoW Prioritization Templates
For those who prefer more structured templates, here are some handy MoSCoW resources:
Reuse these templates for your own MoSCoW workshops to get started quickly. Tweak them as needed to match your process.
Sample MoSCoW Prioritization
To make this more concrete, here is an example MoSCoW analysis for prioritizing requirements for a new project management software product:
Must Have
Task management
Kanban boards
Mobile app
Due dates
Reporting
User management
Native integrations
Should Have
Custom fields
Time tracking
Portfolio hierarchy
Resource management
Custom workflows
Could Have
Auto scheduling
Milestone dependencies
API integrations
Timesheets
Project templates
Won't Have (for now)
Resource leveling
Financials
Doc management
Resource pooling
Skills management
This illuminates the core functionality required to launch the MVP (Must Have) versus optional features that, while nice to have, are lower priority and can wait (Should Have, Could Have).
Explicitly calling out won’t have items also reduces scope creep by acknowledging certain requests that are clearly out of scope.
Recap of MoSCoW Prioritization
Let’s recap what we’ve learned:
MoSCoW is a prioritization method for categorizing requirements or initiatives into Must, Should, Could, and Won’t Have buckets.
It was created for agile software projects but can be used widely for any prioritization.
MoSCoW helps teams align on MVP scope, prevent scope creep, and sequence delivery of the most important work first.
Requirements are assigned to the four categories based on importance and urgency relative to other needs.
Must Haves are critical and non-negotiable. Should Haves are high value but lower priority. Could Haves are nice-to-haves for later. Won’t Haves are out of scope.
MoSCoW offers more granularity than simplistic high/medium/low prioritization and limits scope creep through Won’t Haves.
Use MoSCoW early in a project to get consensus on priorities, then estimate and schedule requirements accordingly.
Revisit and re-MoSCoW regularly as priorities inevitably change.
Prioritizing effectively is a core agile competency. By leveraging the simple yet powerful MoSCoW framework, you can build shared alignment around MVP and release planning - enabling your team to focus efforts on what matters most to drive success.