Skip to main content
FeatureFactory

Guide

Scoring Product Opportunities

Rank ideas you can defend. The intensity, frequency, willingness-to-pay framework in depth, how to weight it, its pitfalls, and how it fits alongside RICE and WSJF.

Best for
Prioritizing a backlog of ideas
Framework
Intensity, frequency, willingness to pay
Compared to
RICE, ICE, WSJF
Frequency
Deterministic, from evidence
Intensity and WTP
Judged from real quotes
Pitfalls
Loud minorities, recency bias

Scoring turns a pile of ideas into a ranked list you can defend. This guide covers the intensity, frequency, willingness-to-pay framework, how to weight it, its pitfalls, and how it compares to RICE, ICE, and WSJF.

1

Frequency: measure it, do not guess it

Frequency is deterministic. Count how many distinct discussions cluster into the opportunity, across how many sources, and how recently. More breadth and more recency means stronger, more durable demand.

2

Intensity: read the emotional temperature

Intensity is how severe the pain is: frustration, workarounds, churn threats, "this is killing us." Score it from the actual language people use, not your own excitement.

3

Willingness to pay: follow the money

Look for mentions of paid tools, budgets, switching costs, and "I would pay for this." Business-critical framing signals real willingness to pay.

4

Weight and combine

Combine the three into a composite score with explicit weights. Make the weights visible so the ranking is transparent and tunable, not a black box.

5

Watch the pitfalls

Beware loud minorities (one vivid thread is not demand), survivorship bias (you only hear from people still around), and recency bias (a spike is not a trend). Breadth and time guard against all three.

FAQ

RICE and ICE score your own estimates of reach, impact, confidence, and effort. This framework scores external demand signal directly. Use demand scoring to decide what is worth doing, then RICE or WSJF to sequence it against effort.

Related guides