RICE Calculator - Prioritize Features with Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort

Reach (1-10):

• 10: >100,000 users per quarter
• 8: 50,000 - 100,000 users per quarter
• 6: 10,000 - 50,000 users per quarter
• 4: 1,000 - 10,000 users per quarter
• 2: 100 - 1,000 users per quarter
• 1: <100 users per quarter

• 10: Transformative - Game-changing for the product
• 8-9: Very High - Significant improvement for many users
• 6-7: High - Notable improvement for some users
• 4-5: Medium - Moderate improvement for a few users
• 2-3: Low - Minor improvement for a small number of users
• 1: Very Low - Barely noticeable improvement

• 1: < 1 month
• 2: 1-2 months
• 3: 2-3 months
• 4: 4-6 months
• 5: 6-12 months
• 6: > 12 months

RICE helps teams objectively prioritize features or projects by considering multiple factors. It balances the potential value of an initiative with the effort required, helping teams focus on high-impact, efficient work.

A higher RICE score indicates that a feature or project should be prioritized. Compare RICE scores across different initiatives to determine their relative priority. The higher the score, the higher the priority.

While RICE is commonly used in product management, it can be applied to various fields where prioritization of initiatives is necessary, such as marketing campaigns, business strategies, or even personal projects.

It's a good practice to recalculate RICE scores periodically, especially when there are significant changes in your product, market, or team capacity. Some teams do this quarterly or during major planning sessions.

Yes, RICE can be used in conjunction with other methods. For example, you might use RICE to prioritize within a specific category of features that was identified using another method like MoSCoW or Kano.

RICE relies on estimates, which can be subjective or inaccurate. It also doesn't account for strategic alignment or dependencies between items. It's important to use RICE as a guide rather than a strict rule, and to combine it with other considerations and expert judgment.

Consistent scoring can be achieved through team discussions, creating detailed guidelines for each parameter, and periodically calibrating scores as a group. It's also helpful to use historical data to inform estimates when possible.