Prioritization for internal platform teams Every team is your customer, and none of them pays you.
Thursday, roadmap review. Data engineering wants the pipeline rewrite, support wants the admin console, sales engineering wants SSO for a deal that closes Friday, and finance wants to know why the migration slipped again. Nobody in the room can say what the platform is for this quarter, so the loudest ask wins and the others escalate.
The intake is a list of objectives, rated by the teams themselves
Instead of a queue of feature requests, the quarter starts with the outcomes each consuming team needs from the platform: fewer tickets, faster onboarding of a new service, less manual provisioning. Each team rates every objective from a private link, with a weight that reflects how much of the platform they actually consume. Nobody rates a program, so nobody can vote for their own thing directly.
You rate what you know: what each program delivers
Coverage is the one grid that is yours. Each square says how much a program delivers an objective, one to five. It is where platform judgment lives, and it is visible to every team, so the argument moves from "why not mine" to "does it really deliver that".
The quarter fits itself to the capacity you have
Set the team capacity for the period and the roadmap shows what fits, must-haves first, and what is deferred with the reason. When SSO comes up on Thursday, rate its coverage and show where it lands and what it displaces, in the meeting.
- A weight per consuming team, set on purpose and visible to all of them
- Roadmap scenarios against real capacity, with the deferred list and the reason each item is out
- A decision report every requesting team can read, including the ones that did not get their thing
Your nouns: objectives and programs (the Portfolio preset), objectives and initiatives, or needs and features. Pick a preset or name your own.
Related
Run the next platform review in Weivo.
Weivo is in private beta. Join the waitlist and we will email you the day it opens.