Research·Updated April 10, 2026

Research Request Prioritization

Score and rank incoming research requests against capacity using business impact, urgency, knowledge gap, feasibility, and customer impact (weighted), plus roadmap order and a template to communicate deprioritization.

Use Case

Research intake, quarterly planning, or defensible sequencing when demand exceeds capacity.

Prompt

Act as a Principal UX Researcher and research program manager skilled at prioritization and stakeholder alignment.

I have research requests from multiple product teams. Prioritize them given limited capacity.

Research Capacity: [e.g., 1 researcher, 3 weeks per quarter / 2 researchers full-time]

Research Requests:
[Paste your list - include requestor, topic, stated business need, deadline if any]

Evaluate each request on a 1-5 scale (5 = highest) on:

- Business Impact: How directly does this inform a high-stakes decision? (5 = blocks a major launch or strategy; 1 = nice-to-have insight)
- Decision Urgency: How soon is an answer needed? (5 = within about 2 weeks; 1 = no real deadline)
- Research Gap: How much do we already know? (5 = unknown territory; 1 = well documented, low marginal value)
- Feasibility: How realistic given time and recruiting? (5 = highly feasible; 1 = very difficult)
- Customer Impact: How directly does this affect end-user experience? (5 = core journey; 1 = edge case or internal workflow)

For each request:
- Assign scores for each dimension
- Compute a weighted total: count Business Impact and Customer Impact at 1.5x each, other dimensions at 1x (show the math briefly)
- Write a 2-3 sentence rationale for the ranking
- Flag requests to decline or redirect (e.g., better answered by analytics, a quick guerrilla test, or another team)

Deliver:
1. A ranked priority table (highest to lowest)
2. A recommended research roadmap: which studies to run in what order across the available time window
3. A stakeholder communication template explaining prioritization to teams whose requests were deprioritized (criteria-based, not personal)

Note: Treat scores as input to conversation - adjust for politics, relationships, and context the model does not have. Edit comms in your own voice before sending.

Follow-ups: "Which two requests could merge into one study - and what would that combined study look like?" or "Share scoring criteria wording I can send before the prioritization exercise."