What needs to be finished first
A defined work queue or backlog with items of comparable scale (features, epics, PIs) exists, ideally with a description of business value.
Team and stakeholders share an understanding of Cost of Delay (business value over time, time criticality, risk reduction / opportunity enablement).
What needs to be ready before start
Table with columns Item, Business Value, Time Criticality, Risk Reduction/Opportunity Enablement, Job Size, WSJF Score; Fibonacci scale cards (1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20); collaborative tool (Planning Poker, Notion, Sheets).
One Product Manager or Product Owner as owner; architect or tech lead for risk and size estimation; 2-5 business stakeholders for value estimation; facilitator (often RTE or Scrum Master).
List of items with description; current PI or quarterly goals; known deadlines and compliance requirements; dependencies between items; experience values for comparable items.
45-90 min
Set up table. Explain Fibonacci scale for relative estimation (no absolute value, always relative to each other). Make definition per factor visible. Define smallest item as 1-reference per factor.
The one question this method answers
Which item delivers the highest Cost-of-Delay value per effort and should be pulled next?
Marker: Sektion
| Step | Duration | Action | Hint |
|---|---|---|---|
1Section 1: Choose reference item | 10 min | For each of the three CoD factors (Business Value, Time Criticality, Risk Reduction / Opportunity Enablement) and for Job Size, define the smallest item as 1-reference. All others are estimated relative to it. | Without reference there is no anchor. Estimates without reference become gut values and produce no relative statement. |
2Section 2: Estimate Business Value relatively | 10-15 min | Per item: how much business value (revenue, cost savings, strategic value) compared with the reference item? Fibonacci scale. In case of disagreement, short discussion and re-vote (Planning Poker). | Value is economic or strategic, not personal enthusiasm. If stakeholders vote 20 without rationale, ask for quantitative support. |
3Section 3: Time Criticality and RR/OE | 15-20 min | Time Criticality: how quickly does the value lose impact (window, competition, deadlines)? RR/OE: how much risk does the item reduce or opportunity enable? Both relative to reference, Fibonacci. | Time Criticality is often misused for "important to me". Be strict: what would be the effect if the item came 3 months later? |
4Section 4: Estimate Job Size | 10-15 min | Estimate Job Size per item in Fibonacci relative to the smallest one. Engineering representatives estimate. Sizes 20+ indicate that the item should be split. | Job Size includes all effort (engineering, design, QA, rollout). If size is unclear, split item or plan a spike before inclusion. |
5Section 5: Score and sequence | 10 min | Formula: WSJF = (Business Value + Time Criticality + RR/OE) / Job Size. Sort in table. Fix top items in pull order. | WSJF gives sequence, not guarantee. Difficult sequences with dependencies need manual correction (for example if item A is technically required before B). |
What comes out at the end
Sorted backlog table with items, factor values, WSJF score, and rank; plus assumptions log with rationale for high Time Criticality or RR/OE values; plus PI plan or pull order with dependencies considered.
Own version per prioritization cycle (PI, quarter). Items that stay across several cycles receive score history so shifts become visible. Lessons learned from delivered item: actual value vs. estimated.
Compact working template for WSJF with context, input, output artifacts, and next step.
Sequences work using Cost of Delay divided by Job Size.
When and for what do we use this method?
Which data, observations, decisions, or materials are available?
Short notes along the runsheet.
Owner, date, and success signal.
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
Concrete filled scenario, fictional example
| Item | BV | TC | RR/OE | Job Size | WSJF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3DS2 Compliance Update | 13 | 20 | 8 | 5 | 8.2 |
| Apple Pay Integration | 8 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 2.0 |
| Multi-Tenancy for Enterprise | 20 | 3 | 13 | 20 | 1.8 |
| Performance Refactoring Order Service | 5 | 3 | 8 | 8 | 2.0 |
| Saved Card Option | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2.7 |
| Loyalty Program | 8 | 3 | 5 | 13 | 1.2 |
Assumptions:
Pull order: 3DS2 (compliance), then Saved Card (quick win), then Performance Refactoring (before Loyalty because stability risk). Multi-Tenancy waits for contract clarification.
Recognize symptoms and steer against them
Participants estimate Business Value in EUR or points without relation to the reference.
Apply reference-item procedure strictly. Values are always "X times more than reference 1". Otherwise values are not comparable.
Everything receives TC=8 or 13 because "everything is urgent".
TC is high only when a real deadline or value decay exists. If item has same value in 3 months, TC is low. Defend or reduce.
Job Size contains risk or complexity (instead of only effort), double-counting with RR/OE.
Job Size = pure effort (person-weeks or relative complexity). Risk belongs into RR/OE or a separate column.
Team follows score strictly and ignores dependencies or strategic topics.
After score calculation, sanity-check against dependencies and strategy. Document manual correction rather than ignoring it.
Job Size 20+ appears frequently; items are epics instead of sliceable features.
Split items with Job Size 20+. WSJF works for features up to medium epics, not mega-initiatives. Otherwise mega-items dominate the ranking.
Done signals checkable in under a minute
Go to the profile for purpose, similar methods, and sources or continue to the next method in the catalog.