This is a prioritization matrix template as a CSV file, with two named axes and six requests already placed on it, so you can see what a filled one looks like before you empty it and put your own in.
What it is not is a scoring sheet. A matrix has two axes and four quadrants, and every request lands in one of them. If you want a formula with four inputs and a decimal at the end, that is RICE and it has its own page.
The six requests in the file are from this product's demo board and the value axis is their revenue weighted score, which is the vote count with each vote carrying the weight of what the voter pays.
What is a prioritization matrix example, filled in?
This one, with the quadrant already worked out for each row.
| Request | Quadrant | Value, revenue weighted | Effort, 1 to 5 | What to do with it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role based permissions | High value low effort | 74 | 2 | Do it next |
| SAML single sign on | High value high effort | 64 | 4 | Plan it properly |
| Public API v2 | High value high effort | 61 | 5 | Plan it properly |
| Bulk CSV import | Low value low effort | 56 | 2 | Fill a gap week with it |
| Dark mode | Low value low effort | 37 | 2 | Fill a gap week with it |
| Scheduled reports | Low value high effort | 30 | 4 | Say no and say why |
The value figures are real, taken from the twenty request demo board. The effort figures are the example's own and are not measured from anything, because effort is the one number no tool can produce for you.
High value means above the median of your own board rather than above a fixed number, and on these six the median value is 58.5. That is why Bulk CSV import at 56 sits in the low value row despite looking healthy, and it is the part of a matrix people get wrong most often.
Take the file. It is a CSV, and it may be copied, changed and used commercially with no attribution and no link back.
What are the types of prioritization matrix?
Three, and they differ in what the axes measure rather than in how they look.
Value against effort. The one in the file above. The axes are what a thing is worth and what it costs to build, and it is the version that survives contact with a real backlog because both axes are things a product team can actually answer.
Urgency against importance. Four quadrants, deciding what to do now, schedule, delegate or drop. It is a personal time management tool wearing a product hat and it is poor at features, because almost nothing on a roadmap is genuinely urgent in the sense that word means.
Risk against impact. Used when the question is what could go wrong rather than what to build next. Real work, different job, and a feature board is the wrong input for it.
The file here is the first type. If your argument is about sequencing features that customers asked for, that is the one you want.
How do you fill it in without inventing numbers?
Take the value axis from something that already exists and set only the effort yourself.
The value column in this file is not a guess. It is the weighted vote total from a board where every vote carries the weight of the customer who cast it, which means the axis was produced by customers rather than by a meeting.
What that weighting does to an order is worked through on twenty requests, where the five with the most voters turn out to hold under a fifth of the weight.
Then set the effort. An hour on the top fifteen is enough, and it is the one input no tool and no customer can give you. The whole of the method sits on the prioritisation entry with the six other techniques beside it.
Who is this file best for?
A team with more requests than a page and no agreed way to talk about them.
A matrix is worth more as an argument settler than as a ranking. Two people who disagree about a feature usually disagree about which axis it is strong on, and putting it in a quadrant forces that into the open in a way a score of 42.7 never does.
If you have fewer than about twenty open requests, you do not need this or anything like it. Read them and decide.