Skip to content
UX Atlas
WorkflowCraft conventionIntermediate

Prioritising Design Work

Deciding what to fix first, using evidence rather than the volume of the most recent complaint.

Definition

Prioritisation ranks candidate work by expected value against cost. For usability issues, the standard inputs are frequency, impact and persistence, which combine into a severity rating.

Craft convention. True because the industry converged on it. Breaking it costs familiarity, not correctness.

On this page
  1. Definition
  2. Severity from three inputs
  3. Rules that keep prioritisation honest
  4. Continue from here

Severity from three inputs

InputQuestion
FrequencyHow many users hit this, and how often?
ImpactWhen they hit it, how much does it cost them? Can they recover?
PersistenceDo they learn to work around it, or does it cost them every time?
ReachIs it on a critical path, or in a rarely visited corner?

Rules that keep prioritisation honest

  • Attach frequency data to every anecdote before it enters the list.
  • Accessibility failures that exclude people outright are not a low priority regardless of how many users are affected.
  • Separate 'quick to fix' from 'important', and be explicit when you are doing something because it is cheap.
  • Revisit the list when new evidence arrives, rather than defending the previous ranking.
  • Record what you decided not to do and why, so the same debate is not repeated monthly.

Continue from here

Each link says what the connection is, so you can tell a principle from an alternative from a thing people mix this up with.

Principles behind this

The reasoning this solution is an application of.

Often used with

These usually appear in the same screen or the same decision.

Check your work

Review passes that test whether this was done properly.

Short definition

The one-paragraph version, for when that is all you need.

Related concept

Connected closely enough to change how you apply this.