SaaS-Produktführungsstrategie

Our roadmap had 47 features marked "high priority." Which means nothing was actually a priority. Here's the framework that fixed our product chaos: Das Problem: Engineering wanted architectural improvements. Sales wanted enterprise features. Customers wanted bug fixes. Design wanted UX overhauls. Leadership wanted revenue features. Everyone's request was "urgent." The Old Approach: Quarterly planning meetings that took 3 weeks. Political debates about priorities. Compromise solutions that satisfied nobody. Roadmaps that changed monthly. The New Framework: RICE + Strategic Themes Every feature request now gets scored: R - Reach (How many users impacted?) I - Impact (How much does it move key metrics?) C - Confidence (How certain are we about reach/impact?) E - Effort (Engineering weeks to build) Score = (R × I × C) / E But we added Strategic Themes: Each quarter has 2-3 themes tied to company goals: Q1 2024 Themes: 1. Enterprise readiness (support $100K+ deals) 2. Core product stability (reduce churn) 3. API ecosystem (enable partners) Features must score 7+ on RICE AND align with a theme to make roadmap. Was sich geändert hat: Before: 47 "high priority" items After: 12 items on roadmap, all justified Before: 3-week planning cycle After: 2-day planning session Before: Constant re-prioritization After: Quarterly adjustments only Example Decision: Marketing wanted: Social sharing features - RICE Score: 8.5 (would reach many users) - Strategic Theme: None - Decision: Backlog for Q2 Engineering wanted: Database optimization - RICE Score: 6.2 (low reach, high effort) - Strategic Theme: Core product stability - Decision: Q1 Roadmap Sales wanted: SSO integration - RICE Score: 5.8 (narrow reach) - Strategic Theme: Enterprise readiness - Decision: Q1 Roadmap The results: - Shipped 11 of 12 planned features (vs 40% before) - Engineering estimates improved (less context switching) - Cross-functional alignment increased - Sales knew what was coming (better forecasting) The lesson: Priorities are only meaningful when most things aren't priorities. Frameworks don't make decisions. But they make decision-making defendable.