Prioritizing product ideas gets messy fast. The RICE prioritization framework gives you a simple, defensible way to rank what’s next. RICE stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence, and Effort—the four inputs you’ll score to generate a single number for each initiative. Reach estimates how many users will be affected; Impact captures how much each will benefit; Confidence reflects how sure you are about those estimates; and Effort tallies the time required across teams. The formula is straightforward: (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort. The result helps you compare unlike ideas objectively, reduce bias, and make trade‑offs explicit.
In this guide, you’ll learn exactly how the RICE formula works, what to measure for each input, and how to set realistic ranges and scales. We’ll walk through a side‑by‑side scoring example, call out best practices and common pitfalls, and explain when RICE shines—and when another framework (like ICE, MoSCoW, or Kano) might fit better. You’ll also see how to turn scores into a roadmap and backlog, plus ready‑to‑use templates and tools to get started right away.
RICE is a structured cost–benefit view: potential value in the numerator (Reach × Impact × Confidence) divided by the work required (Effort). Start by time‑boxing estimates to the same period so scores are comparable, then quantify each input consistently across your team.
RICE = (Reach * Impact * Confidence) / Effort.Next, let’s define Reach and set realistic ranges you can defend.
Reach estimates how many unique users or events will encounter your initiative in a fixed period. Keep the same time window across items (e.g., per quarter) and use real product metrics where possible. In practice, Reach can be users touching a flow, accounts using an affected feature, or feedback events you’ll generate.
Always count uniques and avoid double‑counting repeat visits. Define Reach and the time window before you score anything else.
Impact estimates how much a single user (or account) will benefit when they encounter the change. Choose one outcome you care about—conversion, adoption, retention, or user delight—and keep that definition consistent across initiatives. Because precise measurement is hard, the RICE prioritization framework uses a tiered, multiply-in formula so you can compare ideas without analysis paralysis.
Document your impact assumption, point to evidence (research, past tests), and tie it to the same time window you used for Reach.
Confidence expresses how sure you are about your Reach, Impact, and Effort estimates. Use discrete tiers to avoid false precision and curb excitement for ideas backed by weak data: 100% (high), 80% (medium), 50% (low). Anything below 50% is a moonshot—deprioritize it or run discovery to raise certainty before committing. Treat confidence as a multiplier that rewards well‑evidenced bets and penalizes guesses.
Effort is the denominator in RICE: estimate the total work to ship the initiative across all functions in person-months. Keep it rough and comparable: use whole numbers (or 0.5 when clearly under a month). Because Effort divides value, optimistic estimates distort priorities. Focus on total work to complete (not calendar duration), and include planning, design, engineering, QA, and release tasks.
2 over 1.5 unless it’s truly 0.5.Here’s a simple, time-boxed (per quarter) comparison using the RICE prioritization framework. The inputs use the standard impact scale (3, 2, 1, 0.5, 0.25), confidence tiers (100%, 80%, 50%), and effort in person‑months.
| Initiative | Reach (per quarter) | Impact | Confidence | Effort (PMs) | RICE score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A. Streamline onboarding step | 1,000 | 2 | 0.8 | 3 | 533.33 |
| B. Launch high‑value upsell prompt | 500 | 3 | 0.7 | 2 | 525.00 |
| C. Improve search relevance | 2,000 | 1 | 0.9 | 4 | 450.00 |
Initiative A slightly edges B because its higher reach and solid confidence offset more effort, while C’s broad reach can’t overcome lower per‑user impact and higher effort. Small changes in effort or confidence can flip the order—so document assumptions and revisit scores as new data arrives.
The RICE prioritization framework works best when your inputs are consistent, transparent, and grounded in evidence. Treat the score as a clear starting point for discussion—not a blind rule. Keep the same time window, define terms up front, and write down assumptions so you can revisit them as learning accumulates.
Use the RICE prioritization framework when you need a comparable, evidence‑weighted view across different types of work. It shines for quarterly planning, when you can time‑box reach, align on an impact scale, and estimate total effort across teams. RICE is great for exposing trade‑offs and defending choices with stakeholders.
The RICE prioritization framework isn’t the only way to rank work. Pick the tool that fits the decision you’re making—quantitative trade‑offs, scope negotiation, or understanding user delight. Here’s how RICE compares to three popular options and when to reach for each.
(Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort. Best when reach varies across ideas and you need apples‑to‑apples comparisons.Impact × Confidence × Ease. Faster but omits reach and swaps effort for “ease.” Handy for rapid triage or experiments when reach is uniform or unknown.A RICE score ranks ideas; your roadmap schedules them. Translate scores into time-bound plans by layering constraints (capacity, dependencies, commitments) and strategy (OKRs). Treat the score as your starting point, then deliberately rebalance for sequencing, risk, and stakeholder needs. Keep the backlog transparent so anyone can see why an item made the cut and what must happen first.
You don’t need fancy software to put the RICE prioritization framework to work. Start with a lightweight spreadsheet, agree on shared scales, and connect it to where ideas and evidence live. Then use your roadmap tool to turn scores into a clear plan and status.
Initiative, Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort, RICE = (R*I*C)/E, plus Assumptions.RICE gives your team a shared, defensible way to balance value against cost, compare unlike ideas, and make trade‑offs explicit. Use it as a starting point, not a rulebook: align scores to goals and constraints, document assumptions, and revisit as you learn. To get momentum, agree on scales, time‑box to a quarter, score a short list together, and translate the winners into Now/Next/Later with clear owners and success metrics. Want a faster path from feedback to prioritized roadmap? Capture, deduplicate, and rank requests alongside RICE in Koala Feedback.
Start today and have your feedback portal up and running in minutes.