Kiernan PaulyPMO Director| The Christ HospitalCovington, Ky, United States
We're running into a lot of challenges with project prioritization. We receive far more project requests than we can complete in a year, and it is very important to identify which projects should be prioritized. Has anybody had any success settings up a process to identify ROI, KPI measures, Benefit Analysis, and a ranking system? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Luis BrancoCEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, LdªCarcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal
Absolutely — we faced a similar situation with an overwhelming number of project requests and limited capacity. In fast-paced, resource-constrained environments, having a disciplined intake process is critical to ensure that we’re investing in the right initiatives.
To tackle this, we developed a structured Project Intake and Prioritization Framework that integrates both strategic alignment and quantitative evaluation. Here’s what worked well for us:
1. Establish a Governance Committee
We formed a cross-functional group (PMO, Strategy, Finance, IT, Business Units) to ensure alignment with organizational priorities and bring diverse perspectives into prioritization.
2. Define Standard Evaluation Criteria
We use a scoring model that includes:
- Strategic Alignment – Contribution to strategic goals or compliance
- Financial Metrics – ROI, NPV, payback period
- KPI Impact – Degree of influence on business KPIs
- Risk & Complexity – Technical, operational, and change management risks
- Resource Availability & Dependencies
3. Use a Weighted Scoring Model
Each criterion is weighted based on strategic priorities (e.g., Strategic alignment: 30%, ROI: 25%, Risk: 20%). Projects are scored and ranked accordingly.
4. Implement a Benefits Realization Framework
Sponsors must define expected quantitative and qualitative benefits in a Benefits Register, along with how they’ll be tracked post-implementation — fully aligned with our KPI structure.
5. Capacity Planning & Scenario Modeling
We simulate delivery scenarios quarterly using real resource and capacity data to slot feasible projects.
6. Ensure Transparency & Communication
Scoring results, decisions, and rationale are shared across stakeholders to build trust and prevent bias.
7. Periodic Review
We review the framework every 6 months to ensure it reflects strategy shifts and lessons learned.
This allowed us to move from reactive selection to value-driven prioritization. Saving Changes...
This was a frequent objective of the consulting work I have done with multiple organizations of different scales across different verticals. Regardless of which model or approach is used, a few key principles need to be applied:
1. Commitment from all project funders to follow the process
2. Regularly revisiting the priorities and approach to ensure they meet the business's needs
3. Making sure the prioritization approach facilitates (and does not replace) the conversation
4. Ensuring that both financial and talent capacity is considered when deciding how much concurrent work can begin
5. Ensuring that portfolio components are regularly evaluated so that white elephants can be put out of their misery in a timely and cost effective manner
You might also consider using cost of delay as an alternate prioritization method...
We've set up what I guess you could call 'portfolio management lite'. We're a small company. The leadership team meets weekly. Since I started, I've brought up work intake, prioritization/ranking and weighting methods, and portfolio management. Last year, we were discussing our strategic direction and how to stay on track. Instead of using PM jargon, I suggested we use our existing meeting and call it a steering committee. I compiled all the requests into a master list and then we all went through them, identified the top priorities, and then selected the top few that were in alignment with our strategic direction.
When we meet, we review progress, any major risks or issues, new requests that need reviewed at our level (not everything does), and identify what to work on next. There's a lot that's not going to get done, which is okay because we're focusing on the things that are expected to have the greatest impact and choosing to not do things that would basically be distractions from getting high-value work done.
Things are evolving and I'm influencing it toward more formal portfolio management. We'll see how it transforms over time. Saving Changes...
Luis BrancoCEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, LdªCarcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal
Kiron Bondale — excellent contribution!
I fully agree with the principles you've highlighted, especially the importance of keeping the prioritization process as a facilitator of meaningful conversations rather than a replacement for them.
Effective prioritization needs to balance structure with flexibility and remain value-driven.
In our experience, we’ve complemented this principle-based approach with a practical evaluation framework, using weighted criteria such as strategic alignment, ROI, KPI impact, risk, and capacity.
The Cost of Delay, which you mentioned, has also been a valuable lens, particularly in agile delivery contexts.
Combining structural discipline with the foundational elements you outlined — like organizational commitment and regular reassessment — has helped us shift from reactive decision-making to a value-centric, strategically aligned prioritization process.
Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
My recomendation is taking a look to Lean Portfolio Management. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
