methodatlas

Product Strategy Decision method

ICE Scoring

Compares ideas through Impact, Confidence, and Ease with anchored scales and visible evidence.

ICE is a lightweight ranking, not a business case. Impact, confidence, and ease need references; confidence reflects evidence strength. The score supports discussion.

Core question
Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?
Plan ICE ScoringMethod guide
Start comparison
Give feedbackIs this method useful to you?
Participants
2-8
Time
30-60 min

ICE Scoring uses ICE = Impact × Confidence × Ease using consistent 1–10 scales. Assessments remain justified and context-bound.

Paper illustration of ICE Scoring with its method-specific working model.

  1. Calibrate scales

    Calibrate scales

    Set impact, confidence, and ease anchors using reference ideas.

  2. Score ideas

    Score ideas

    Score every idea independently and document evidence.

  3. Rank and challenge

    Rank and challenge

    Calculate ICE, challenge outliers, and select the next test.

Update confidence and impact after tests; retain the scale version.

A good fit when

Useful for a rough first comparison of many ideas, not as the sole major investment decision.

Ideal for

  • Growth backlogs
  • Experiment pipelines
  • Quick reviews

Not good for

  • Strategic roadmap decisions

Outputs

  • ICE ranking

    ICE ranking with traceable sources, assumptions, and domain decisions.

  • Decision and review trail

    Owners, dates, and next review for ICE ranking.

ICE ranking

Fictional worked example

ICE = Impact × Confidence × Ease using consistent 1–10 scales as a precise working structure with a fictional example.

ICE ranking
ItemImpactConfidenceEaseICE score
ICE rankingWorked example7: affects 22% of drop-offs.8: funnel + 12 replays.6 after technical spike.7 × 8 × 6 = 336.

  1. 1. Impact

    ICE ranking
    7: affects 22% of drop-offs.

  2. 2. Confidence

    ICE ranking
    8: funnel + 12 replays.

  3. 3. Ease

    ICE ranking
    6 after technical spike.

  4. 4. ICE score

    ICE ranking
    7 × 8 × 6 = 336.

The example demonstrates the domain logic of ICE Scoring; worksheets remain blank.

GrowthHackers: ICE Score

First step

Start with the core question: Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?

Open the method guide

Where to go next?

Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring

Vets the top ideas from the rough ICE ranking with a more robust RICE score.

Paper illustration of Experiment Canvas with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Product Discovery
Experiment Canvas

Formalizes the next test for the highest-scored idea.

Deep dive

Purpose

When ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list.

How it works

It rates every idea along the same three lenses and compares the results directly against each other. Impact, Confidence, and Ease reveal whether an option has strong potential, is well substantiated, and remains testable at a reasonable effort.

In detail

ICE Scoring comes from the growth-hacking world and was popularized by Sean Ellis, among others. The three dimensions are intentionally rough so that ideas can be compared quickly. ICE works well for idea backlogs and growth experiments, but it is less rigorous than RICE.

Facilitation

Define the scales in advance. Do not average away disagreement; discuss the differences instead.

The method guide walks execution through 3 phases, timing, 3 pitfalls, and clear stop criteria.

Open method guide

Your perspective

Does this method help with your work?

Your feedback helps shape the next improvements to methodatlas.

Sources and topics

Topics
PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision
Sources
GrowthHackers Community: The Practical Advantage of the ICE Scorecommunity.growthhackers.comSuccessor GrowthHackers Community page on the ICE Score; workflow and limitations are original teaching material.
In playbooks
Develop and Select IdeasMove from a stuck solution view through an expanded solution space to a prioritized selection of ideas.
Artifact templates
ICE Scoring: WorksheetPlan ICE Scoring around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.
markdown

ice-scoring-working-template.md

Plan ICE Scoring around its domain steps and the concrete decision question.

ICE Scoring: Worksheet

Question

To be confirmed

Desired outcome

To be confirmed

Scope

Full workshop Time: 30–45 minutes

Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.

Preparation for this scope

Method setup

  • Materials: Comparable ideas, Impact, confidence, and ease anchors, Evidence per idea, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.
  • Roles: Product · Analytics · Engineering/Delivery · domain role
  • Advance information: Collect Comparable ideas, Impact, confidence, and ease anchors, Evidence per idea in advance and mark open assumptions.
  • Overall time needed: 30–45 minutes
  • Setup: Prepare ICE = Impact × Confidence × Ease using consistent 1–10 scales visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.

Prepare for the work steps

Calibrate scales: Calibrate scales

  • Comparable ideas
  • Impact, confidence, and ease anchors
  • Evidence per idea

Score ideas: Score ideas

  • ICE scales
  • Impact, confidence, and ease anchors
  • Evidence per idea

Rank and challenge: Rank and challenge

  • scoring table
  • Impact, confidence, and ease anchors
  • Evidence per idea

ICE ranking

Item1–10 + anchor1–10 using evidence anchors1–10: 10 = very easyImpact × Confidence × Ease
ICE ranking
  • ICE ranking: Worked example

Enter only real input, sources, and decisions.

GrowthHackers: ICE Score

Calibrate scales: Calibrate scales

Expected artifact: ICE scales

ICE scales · source · uncertainty · next decision

Entry:

...

  • Are 1, 5, and 10 concrete?

Score ideas: Score ideas

Expected artifact: scoring table

scoring table · source · uncertainty · next decision

Entry:

...

  • Is confidence derived from evidence strength?

Rank and challenge: Rank and challenge

Expected artifact: ICE ranking

ICE ranking · source · uncertainty · next decision

Entry:

...

  • Does uncertainty remain visible beside the score?

Open questions and next steps

...

Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/ice-scoring/run-sheet

Alternatives and neighbors

Fitting alternatives with decision guidance, followed by other related methods.

All methods
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring

Instead of ICE Scoring, choose RICE Scoring when reach per idea should additionally flow explicitly into the assessment and more comparative precision is needed.

Paper illustration of Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay

Moves scope, order, and delivery flow toward a concrete result through "adopt the initiative list", "clarify value types for each initiative, such as revenue, efficiency, or risk", and "derive a sorted sequence".

Paper illustration of a MoSCoW board with four columns and a visible release boundary.
Delivery
MoSCoW

Prioritizes requirements across must, should, could, and won't, creating a negotiable release set with clear boundaries.

Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB

Links data, insights, beliefs, and bets so strategy and product decisions become traceable and reviewable.

Paper illustration of GIST Planning with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
GIST Planning

Connects goals, ideas, step projects, and tasks so product planning stays outcome-oriented and adaptive.

A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model

Classifies features by their effect on satisfaction, showing which expectations create basic, performance, or delight response.

Constraints and origin
LowWorkshop + async30-60 min

Profile

Method form
Decision method
Participants
2-8
Time
30-60 min
Maturity
Established
Origin
Sean Ellis
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Next up: RICE Scoring