methodatlas
Method guideProduct Strategy

ICE Scoring

A practical method guide: clarify prerequisites and materials, understand the complete process, and look up outputs, pitfalls, and stop criteria.

ComplexityLow
Time30-60 min
Participants2-8
FormatWorkshop + async
MaturityEstablished
Plan ICE Scoring
01

Prerequisite

What needs to be finished first

Complete firstBounded subject

The scope and purpose of ICE Scoring are stated as a concrete question.

Without scope, ICE ranking becomes arbitrary.
Complete firstAccess to relevant perspectives

Comparable ideas, Impact, confidence, and ease anchors, Evidence per idea and domain decision makers are available.

Without these perspectives, central claims in ICE ranking remain unsupported.
02

Preparation

What needs to be ready before start

Materials

Comparable ideas, Impact, confidence, and ease anchors, Evidence per idea, shared workspace, source links, and decision log.

People / roles

Product · Analytics · Engineering/Delivery · domain role

Pre-read

Collect Comparable ideas, Impact, confidence, and ease anchors, Evidence per idea in advance and mark open assumptions.

Time needed

30–45 minutes

Setup

Prepare ICE = Impact × Confidence × Ease using consistent 1–10 scales visibly and calibrate assessment terms before starting.

03

Core question

The one question this method answers

Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?

04

Flow

Phases with goal, actions, output and pitfall

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

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

  1. 1

    Calibrate scales

    Calibrate scales

    Goal

    Produce ICE scales so the core question “Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?” can be answered with stronger support.

    Inputs for this step

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

    Actions

    • Set impact, confidence, and ease anchors using reference ideas.
    • Record source, rationale, and open uncertainty directly in ICE scales.

    Output

    ICE scales

    ICE scales · source · uncertainty · next decision

    Quality check

    Are 1, 5, and 10 concrete?

    Pitfall

    Inconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable. Calibrate scales against reference ideas, define evidence levels, and document the formula convention.

    Timing: 10–20 minutes

  2. 2

    Score ideas

    Score ideas

    Goal

    Produce scoring table so the core question “Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?” can be answered with stronger support.

    Inputs for this step

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

    Actions

    • Score every idea independently and document evidence.
    • Record source, rationale, and open uncertainty directly in scoring table.

    Output

    scoring table

    scoring table · source · uncertainty · next decision

    Quality check

    Is confidence derived from evidence strength?

    Pitfall

    Inconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable. Calibrate scales against reference ideas, define evidence levels, and document the formula convention.

    Timing: 10–20 minutes

  3. 3

    Rank and challenge

    Rank and challenge

    Goal

    Produce ICE ranking so the core question “Which idea offers relatively high impact with strong evidence and reasonable effort?” can be answered with stronger support.

    Inputs for this step

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

    Actions

    • Calculate ICE, challenge outliers, and select the next test.
    • Record source, rationale, and open uncertainty directly in ICE ranking.

    Output

    ICE ranking

    ICE ranking · source · uncertainty · next decision

    Quality check

    Does uncertainty remain visible beside the score?

    Pitfall

    Inconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable. Calibrate scales against reference ideas, define evidence levels, and document the formula convention.

    Timing: 10–20 minutes

05

Artifact

What comes out at the end

Sketch: what the artifact looks like

ICE Scoring · Fast Idea PrioritizationRoughly score ideas by Impact, Confidence, and Ease, multiply them, and choose the next test or build option
ICE ScoringThe visual shows an idea backlog, ICE scoring by Impact, Confidence, and Ease, and the resulting top idea.Make ideas comparable quickly enoughICE prioritizes roughly and transparently: impact, confidence, and ease become visible together.Idea backlogmake options roughly comparableScale 1-10explain Impact, Confidence, andEase consistentlyICE scoreboardIdeaICEScoreShorten onboarding876336Referral hook758280Dashboard tour589360Top ideahighest ICE score is testedfirstRough, not exactdiscuss differences, do not justaverage numbersscorequicklyI × C × Eselect bestcandidates
Form

Versioned ICE ranking with date, sources, owners, and next review.

Versioning / ownership

Retain date, source, assumption state, and decision for every version of ICE ranking.

Tool alternatives
  • ICE ranking as board or document
  • Source and evidence register
  • Decision and action log

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

06

Example output

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

Fictional example for orientation. Counts and timings describe this case and are not universal requirements.

ice-scoring-beispiel.md

Concrete filled scenario, fictional example

Fictional example: guided import check. Impact 7/10, confidence 8/10 from funnel data and 12 replays, ease 6/10 after a spike. ICE = 7 × 8 × 6 = 336.

07

Pitfalls

Recognize symptoms and steer against them

Quick overview, the full text is in the matching phase in the flow

  1. Calibrate scalesInconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable.View in phase
  2. Score ideasInconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable.View in phase
  3. Rank and challengeInconsistent anchors or effort instead of ease make ICE scores methodologically incomparable.View in phase
08

Stop criteria

When to pause, resolve prerequisites, or choose another approach

ICE ranking answers the core question with traceable evidence or explicitly marked uncertainty.
Owners, next actions, and review dates are named for open points.

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.

View in playbookDevelop and Select IdeasMove from a stuck solution view through an expanded solution space to a prioritized selection of ideas.

Finished the method guide?

Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.

Go to profileMore methods