ATT Prioritization Matrix

Purpose

To clearly articulate and communicate our prioritization framework, in order to manage expectations and streamline our responses to incoming tasks and requests. This is intended to be a living document.

Prioritization Considerations

The first consideration of incoming work is ownership. Is this task something that clearly belongs to another team? If so, the work will be delegated to the unit that has ownership of the task and we will serve as project consultants as needed.

A second consideration is whether the incoming work supports strategic library priorities identified by LSC. Work that supports these initiatives will be given a higher priority.

Tasks that we own will be classified along two dimensions: impact and effort. Definitions of the areas of impact will be provided below.

Impact: who and what is impacted?

• Visibility
• Users affected
• Finances
• Vendor relations
• External projects

Effort: how much effort is required?

• How long will it take (best estimate)?
• Systems impacted: Does the issue only involve Alma, or is it an integration with other systems?
• Code-writing requirements: Does it Involve writing code or working with norm rules and other scripting features within Alma?
• Is it a new function/feature/workflow or a change to an existing workflow?
• Is it part of a larger planned project?

Conceptual Framework

Scales of Priority

The Alma Tech Team will use the following tables to determine the impact of an incoming issue or task.

Definitions

External Visibility

Does this work have external visibility for PUL?

1. Is this work needed for a library publication or staff presentation?
2. Does this work resolve an issue with access to library resources?
3. Is this work a request for data that will be provided to external bodies (such as ARL annual statistics)?

Users Affected

1. How many Princeton University-affiliated users are affected by this task? One person, several, or all users?
2. What types of users are affected by or interested in this task? A library administrator (LSC, LAT), faculty, students, library staff, consortial peers? It is noted that an administrator often represents many users.
3. Does this issue affect the work of library staff? If so, is it a complete stoppage of work, or a degradation of work?

Finances

1. Does this issue result in PUL being out of compliance with University policies, or did it come from an auditor’s report?
2. Does this issue result in PUL not being able to pay vendors or order materials?

Vendor Relations

Does this work affect our relationships with vendors? Examples include:

• Providing needed information to vendors to begin or adjust a new program with them (e.g., updating tech specs for shelf-ready records, starting a new approval plan)
• Reconciling active orders in Alma with active orders in vendor systems

Time Required

1. Does this task have a hard deadline? Examples include providing annual statistics on time.
2. Is this a workflow issue that has a lasting impact (lastingness)? Examples include revising a workflow that results in lost data or developing a new workflow for a new project that many staff will utilize.

External Projects

1. Is this work part of a project of a larger group that includes PUL as a member? These projects often have timelines that PUL must honor to ensure the success of the larger project.
2. Is this work connected to initiatives of the University that PUL must prioritize?

Support Level Tiers

Tasks analyzed using prioritization matrix are assigned tier 1 - 3 [definitions in progress]

Implementation

Scrum Product Owner applies this logic to the prioritization of tickets in our product backlog. 
Initially (pre-scrum) we used ZenHub pipelines (columns): Do Now, Do Next, Do Later, Postpone