Purpose
When many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.
Product Strategy Decision method
RICE Scoring
Prioritises comparable initiatives using shared assumptions.
RICE ranks initiatives by reach, impact, confidence, and effort. The score supports shared prioritisation and makes uncertainty and justified exceptions visible.
Which initiative promises the greatest expected contribution to our goal relative to effort?
- Participants
- 2-10
- Time
- 60-90 min
Four factors produce a comparison score. Decisions also consider dependencies, commitments and uncertainty.
Frame
Frame the comparison
Agree on goal, period and initiatives.
Impact
Estimate Reach and Impact
Separate reach from effect per person.
Evidence
Add Confidence and Effort
Expose uncertainty and total work.
Review
Check score and sensitivity
Calculate and vary critical assumptions.
Decision
Set a justified priority
Connect ordering with context and ownership.
Recalculate when evidence or effort changes. Check ranking changes and document the decision with its reasons.
A good fit when
You compare initiatives with a shared goal, fixed period and reasonably similar scope.
Ideal for
- Roadmaps
- Growth backlogs
- Portfolio triage
Not good for
- Very vague ideas
- Purely political decisions
Outputs
Comparable RICE table
Factors with shared units and sources.
Reviewed uncertainty
Assumptions that could change the ordering.
Prioritization decision
Ordering, rationale and next review date.
Calculate RICE with consistent assumptions
Fictional worked example
Fictional example: two improvements to a booking app compared over the same quarter. All numbers are invented.
RICE = Reach × Impact × (Confidence / 100) / Effort
| Initiative | Reachpeople / quarter | Impactfactor | Confidence% | Effortperson-months | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simplify booking | 1,200 | 2 | 80% | 4 | 480 |
| Add reminders | 600 | 3 | 50% | 2 | 450 |
- Simplify booking: Evidence
- Fictional: usage data and several interviews; effort estimated together.
- Add reminders: Evidence
- Fictional: bounded reach; high impact is still only an assumption.
480 is slightly ahead of 450. If booking effort rises from 4 to 6 person-months, its score drops to 320. The ordering depends on an uncertain assumption.
First step
Agree on one decision goal, period and comparable initiatives. Define units before estimating.
Good to do first
Deep dive
How it works
It assigns each initiative a comparable score and records the assumptions behind the numbers. Confidence matters especially because it shows whether priority comes from solid evidence or just optimistic expectations of impact.
In detail
RICE helps because it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort, four different perspectives on priority, into one shared scoring logic. Good use treats the numbers as condensed arguments and discloses where data is missing or assumptions are shaky. This makes it easier to tell whether an initiative moves up because of genuinely high impact or just because of optimistic estimates.
Facilitation
Prepare the inputs so every dimension can be briefly justified and confidence doesn't just become a substitute for gut feeling. The relevant threshold sits exactly where high impact is paired with very weak confidence. Toward the end, bundle a transparent ranking, marked uncertainties, and a note on which data would make the biggest difference.
The method guide walks execution through 5 phases, timing, 5 pitfalls, and clear stop criteria.
Open method guideYour perspective
Does this method help with your work?
Your feedback helps shape the next improvements to methodatlas.
Sources and topics
Artifact templates
RICE Scoring: WorksheetPrepare comparable initiatives and the evidence needed for estimates.markdown
RICE Scoring: WorksheetPrepare comparable initiatives and the evidence needed for estimates.
markdownrice-working-template.md
Prepare comparable initiatives and the evidence needed for estimates.
RICE Scoring: Worksheet
Question
To be confirmed
Desired outcome
To be confirmed
Scope
Run a prioritization comparison Time: 60 to 90 minutes with prepared inputs
Complete this worksheet on paper or in your own document during the work.
Preparation for this scope
Method setup
- Materials: Shared scoring table, clearly described initiatives, usage data, customer evidence and effort estimates.
- Roles: Product · domain and customer perspective · Engineering · decision owner
- Advance information: Gather initiatives, usage data, impact hypotheses and effort ranges. Record the period, source and uncertainty.
- Overall time needed: 60–90 minutes for a prepared comparison; research separately.
- Setup: Use one row per initiative. Reach counts affected people in the chosen period. Impact expresses the effect per person on the shared goal. For example, use Intercom’s scale of 3 / 2 / 1 / 0.5 / 0.25. Enter Confidence as a percentage, such as 100 / 80 / 50 for different levels of supporting evidence. Effort covers total work in person-months and must be greater than zero.
Prepare for the work steps
Frame: Frame the comparison
- Prioritization question
- Described initiatives
Impact: Estimate Reach and Impact
- Usage data and customer evidence
Evidence: Add Confidence and Effort
- Evidence quality
- Estimates from those doing the work
Review: Check score and sensitivity
- Four factors per initiative
Decision: Set a justified priority
- Reviewed ranking
- Dependencies and commitments
Calculate RICE with consistent assumptions
RICE = Reach × Impact × (Confidence / 100) / Effort
| Initiative | Reach (people / quarter) | Impact (factor) | Confidence (%) | Effort (person-months) | Score | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agree on the same period, goal and units before entering values. Enter Confidence as a percentage. Record sources and open assumptions for each initiative; Effort must be greater than zero.
RICE by Intercom · original example calculation
Frame: Frame the comparison
Expected artifact: Comparison frame
Goal · period · units
Entry:
...
- Are the initiatives meaningfully comparable?
Impact: Estimate Reach and Impact
Expected artifact: Impact estimate
Reach · Impact · evidence
Entry:
...
- Is reach counted only once?
- Does impact refer to the same goal?
Evidence: Add Confidence and Effort
Expected artifact: Complete factors
Confidence · Effort · assumptions
Entry:
...
- Is confidence grounded in evidence?
- Is effort positive and complete?
Review: Check score and sensitivity
Expected artifact: Reviewed ranking
Score · range · ranking changes
Entry:
...
- Is 80 percent calculated as 0.8?
- Does the ordering survive plausible changes?
Decision: Set a justified priority
Expected artifact: Prioritization decision
Priority · reasons · owner · review date
Entry:
...
- Are exceptions to the score explained?
- Is the next review clear?
Open questions and next steps
...
Method guide: https://methodatlas.meierhoff-systems.de/en/methods/rice/run-sheet
Alternatives and neighbors
Fitting alternatives with decision guidance, followed by other related methods.
Delivery
MoSCoW
Instead of RICE Scoring, when you want to use MoSCoW to sort requirements into must, should, could, and won't.
Product Strategy
ICE Scoring
Moves target group, value, goals, and priorities toward a concrete result through "prepare the idea backlog", "define scales for I, C, and E", and "select top ideas for testing or building".
Product Discovery
Opportunity Scoring
Moves customer problem, solution idea, and evidence toward a concrete result through "collect outcomes from discovery", "define an importance scale", and "calculate and sort the score".
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".
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Weighs options against criteria so comparison, scoring rationale, and selection are documented traceably.
Product Strategy
GIST Planning
Connects goals, ideas, step projects, and tasks so product planning stays outcome-oriented and adaptive.
Constraints and origin
MediumWorkshop + async60-90 min
Profile
- Method form
- Decision method
- Participants
- 2-10
- Time
- 60-90 min
- Maturity
- Established
- Origin
- Intercom
Next up: OKRs