Strategic significance

Prioritisation isn’t just a to-do list exercise. It determines which ideas fuel growth, which partnerships thrive, and which markets you conquer first. According to McKinsey, organisations that adopt rigorous prioritisation practices are 50% more likely to meet or exceed their strategic targets (“Achieving Successful Digital Transformations,” McKinsey & Company). This matters because every decision you defer or mis-rank carries a real cost in lost revenue, wasted effort and team frustration.

‍

The Framework

When choosing between the Eisenhower Matrix and the RICE model, we recommend evaluating both through our 3-Dimensional Prioritisation Compass. This model helps you calibrate urgency, impact and effort - so you can pick the approach that aligns with your context.

Part 1 – Map Urgency and Importance

The Eisenhower Matrix splits tasks into four quadrants: urgent-important, not urgent-important, urgent-not important and neither.

• Relevance: It’s ideal when your calendar is dominated by reactive work - think crisis responses or last-minute stakeholder demands.
  
  
• Example: A regional VP moved all compliance audits from “urgent-not important” to “not urgent-important” by scheduling them quarterly instead of reacting daily to audit requests.
  
  

Reflection prompt: Which ongoing fires are diverting you from high-value work?
Micro-action: Block two hours this week to categorise every open item into the four quadrants.

Part 2 – Score Potential Impact

RICE stands for Reach, Impact, Confidence and Effort. You assign each initiative a numeric score and rank accordingly.

• Relevance: Best suited when you balance features, process improvements or strategic bets - where quantifiable outcomes matter.
  
  
• Example: A software leader created a RICE spreadsheet for ten proposed features. The top-ranked feature promised to reach 20,000 users, with 80% confidence and low development effort. It delivered a 15% uptick in trial conversions.
  
  

Reflection prompt: What metrics would you use to measure success - and how confident are you in those estimates?
Micro-action: Draft RICE scores for your next three major initiatives - use conservative estimates on both reach and confidence.

Part 3 – Assess Required Effort

Both frameworks demand honest effort estimates - but in different ways.

• Eisenhower: Effort often implied through quadrant placement (urgent tasks might feel high effort).
  
  
• RICE: Effort is explicitly scored, making trade-offs clear when high-impact items also demand heavy resources.
  
  
• Example: A finance team initially prioritised an “urgent” quarterly report over a “high-impact” automation project. By switching to RICE, they saw the automation’s effort score was moderate, and it would save 200 staff hours each quarter - so they re-ordered priorities.
  
  

Reflection prompt: Which of your “urgent” tasks would you reconsider if you knew the real effort vs benefit ratio?
Micro-action: For the top two quadrants in your Eisenhower Matrix, attach an effort score from 1 (minimal) to 5 (extensive).

‍

Bringing it to life in your organisation

Step 1 – Select your primary lens
Decide whether urgency-importance (Eisenhower) or quantitative scoring (RICE) fits today’s challenges.

Step 2 – Run a prioritisation workshop
Gather your leadership team for a 90-minute session. Map items on the matrix, then overlay RICE scoring on the top two quadrants.

Pro Tip: Limit the initial list to 8–12 items to avoid decision fatigue.

Step 3 – Establish a review cadence
Set a fortnightly revisit: update scores, shift tasks between quadrants, and celebrate progress transparently.

Missteps we’ve witnessed

• Treating frameworks as one-and-done – Teams often apply Eisenhower or RICE once and abandon them. Remedy: Integrate into bi-weekly leadership meetings.
  
  
• Over-precision in scoring – Obsessing over RICE numbers slows you down. Remedy: Use broad bands (e.g., high/medium/low) for reach and effort.
  
  
• Ignoring qualitative factors – Neither model captures political or cultural nuances. Remedy: Add a “context check” after scoring to account for stakeholder dynamics.
  
  
• Skipping stakeholder alignment – Priorities set in isolation rarely stick. Remedy: Co-create the prioritisation criteria with all key functions.
  
  

Executive reflection corner

Prompt 1: Where have you been consistently reactive rather than strategic in the past quarter?
Prompt 2: Spend five minutes journalling on one project you deprioritised - did that decision free up time for higher-value work?

Value realised

• Faster strategic pivots – Teams can shift focus within days, not months.
• Resilient culture – Clear criteria reduce frustration and foster trust.
• Measurable outcomes – RICE data points translate directly into KPIs and OKRs.
• Controlled urgency – Eisenhower’s matrix helps contain “always-on” firefighting.

Your next strategic move

• This week: Convene a 30-minute huddle to vet your top five backlog items using the 3-Dimensional Prioritisation Compass.
  
  
• Join the conversation: Share your biggest prioritisation challenge in the comments or email us at vishakha.singh@habitsforthinking.in - let’s refine these approaches together.
  
  

Team SHIFT

‍