02 · Service

Portfolio & prioritization

A way to choose what ships next — balancing risk, value, readiness, and organisational capacity.

Why does AI prioritization fail at mid-market firms?

Two reasons. First, the loudest stakeholder wins, regardless of fit. Second, capacity is invisible — firms commit to five initiatives when they have headroom for two. Our scoring model surfaces capacity explicitly, and the executive workshop forces a sequenced answer rather than a parallel one.

What does the scoring model evaluate?

Four dimensions: value (cash-equivalent impact, time-to-value), readiness (data, workflow, governance), capacity (internal team load, change tolerance), and risk (regulatory, reputational, technical). Each candidate gets a score; the roadmap sequences by score and dependency.

How does this connect to delivery?

Direct. The top-ranked initiative on the roadmap is usually the first delivery engagement we scope (or a partner does). We hand off with a brief, an owner, and a target outcome — not a slide.

Frequently asked

Is the output a deck or a working tool?
Both. The scoring model is a working spreadsheet your team uses as the candidate list evolves. The roadmap is a 1-page executive summary plus the underlying detail. We optimize for what gets used in week six, not what looks best in week three.
How do you handle disagreement among the executive team?
The scoring model creates a structured disagreement — instead of arguing about whether initiative A should ship first, the conversation becomes ‘what do we believe about A’s readiness score?’ That is a more productive argument and usually resolves in one workshop.

Related