moscow presentation

• Integrations
• Learning Center

MoSCoW Prioritization

What is moscow prioritization.

MoSCoW prioritization, also known as the MoSCoW method or MoSCoW analysis, is a popular prioritization technique for managing requirements. 

  The acronym MoSCoW represents four categories of initiatives: must-have, should-have, could-have, and won’t-have, or will not have right now. Some companies also use the “W” in MoSCoW to mean “wish.”

What is the History of the MoSCoW Method?

Software development expert Dai Clegg created the MoSCoW method while working at Oracle. He designed the framework to help his team prioritize tasks during development work on product releases.

You can find a detailed account of using MoSCoW prioritization in the Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) handbook . But because MoSCoW can prioritize tasks within any time-boxed project, teams have adapted the method for a broad range of uses.

How Does MoSCoW Prioritization Work?

Before running a MoSCoW analysis, a few things need to happen. First, key stakeholders and the product team need to get aligned on objectives and prioritization factors. Then, all participants must agree on which initiatives to prioritize.

At this point, your team should also discuss how they will settle any disagreements in prioritization. If you can establish how to resolve disputes before they come up, you can help prevent those disagreements from holding up progress.

Finally, you’ll also want to reach a consensus on what percentage of resources you’d like to allocate to each category.

With the groundwork complete, you may begin determining which category is most appropriate for each initiative. But, first, let’s further break down each category in the MoSCoW method.

Start prioritizing your roadmap

Moscow prioritization categories.

1. Must-have initiatives

As the name suggests, this category consists of initiatives that are “musts” for your team. They represent non-negotiable needs for the project, product, or release in question. For example, if you’re releasing a healthcare application, a must-have initiative may be security functionalities that help maintain compliance.

The “must-have” category requires the team to complete a mandatory task. If you’re unsure about whether something belongs in this category, ask yourself the following.

If the product won’t work without an initiative, or the release becomes useless without it, the initiative is most likely a “must-have.”

2. Should-have initiatives

Should-have initiatives are just a step below must-haves. They are essential to the product, project, or release, but they are not vital. If left out, the product or project still functions. However, the initiatives may add significant value.

“Should-have” initiatives are different from “must-have” initiatives in that they can get scheduled for a future release without impacting the current one. For example, performance improvements, minor bug fixes, or new functionality may be “should-have” initiatives. Without them, the product still works.

3. Could-have initiatives

Another way of describing “could-have” initiatives is nice-to-haves. “Could-have” initiatives are not necessary to the core function of the product. However, compared with “should-have” initiatives, they have a much smaller impact on the outcome if left out.

So, initiatives placed in the “could-have” category are often the first to be deprioritized if a project in the “should-have” or “must-have” category ends up larger than expected.

4. Will not have (this time)

One benefit of the MoSCoW method is that it places several initiatives in the “will-not-have” category. The category can manage expectations about what the team will not include in a specific release (or another timeframe you’re prioritizing).

Placing initiatives in the “will-not-have” category is one way to help prevent scope creep . If initiatives are in this category, the team knows they are not a priority for this specific time frame. 

Some initiatives in the “will-not-have” group will be prioritized in the future, while others are not likely to happen. Some teams decide to differentiate between those by creating a subcategory within this group.

How Can Development Teams Use MoSCoW?

  Although Dai Clegg developed the approach to help prioritize tasks around his team’s limited time, the MoSCoW method also works when a development team faces limitations other than time. For example: 

Prioritize based on budgetary constraints.

What if a development team’s limiting factor is not a deadline but a tight budget imposed by the company? Working with the product managers, the team can use MoSCoW first to decide on the initiatives that represent must-haves and the should-haves. Then, using the development department’s budget as the guide, the team can figure out which items they can complete. 

Prioritize based on the team’s skillsets.

A cross-functional product team might also find itself constrained by the experience and expertise of its developers. If the product roadmap calls for functionality the team does not have the skills to build, this limiting factor will play into scoring those items in their MoSCoW analysis.

Prioritize based on competing needs at the company.

Cross-functional teams can also find themselves constrained by other company priorities. The team wants to make progress on a new product release, but the executive staff has created tight deadlines for further releases in the same timeframe. In this case, the team can use MoSCoW to determine which aspects of their desired release represent must-haves and temporarily backlog everything else.

What Are the Drawbacks of MoSCoW Prioritization?

  Although many product and development teams have prioritized MoSCoW, the approach has potential pitfalls. Here are a few examples.

1. An inconsistent scoring process can lead to tasks placed in the wrong categories.

  One common criticism against MoSCoW is that it does not include an objective methodology for ranking initiatives against each other. Your team will need to bring this methodology to your analysis. The MoSCoW approach works only to ensure that your team applies a consistent scoring system for all initiatives.

Pro tip: One proven method is weighted scoring, where your team measures each initiative on your backlog against a standard set of cost and benefit criteria. You can use the weighted scoring approach in ProductPlan’s roadmap app .

2. Not including all relevant stakeholders can lead to items placed in the wrong categories.

To know which of your team’s initiatives represent must-haves for your product and which are merely should-haves, you will need as much context as possible.

For example, you might need someone from your sales team to let you know how important (or unimportant) prospective buyers view a proposed new feature.

One pitfall of the MoSCoW method is that you could make poor decisions about where to slot each initiative unless your team receives input from all relevant stakeholders. 

3. Team bias for (or against) initiatives can undermine MoSCoW’s effectiveness.

Because MoSCoW does not include an objective scoring method, your team members can fall victim to their own opinions about certain initiatives. 

One risk of using MoSCoW prioritization is that a team can mistakenly think MoSCoW itself represents an objective way of measuring the items on their list. They discuss an initiative, agree that it is a “should have,” and move on to the next.

But your team will also need an objective and consistent framework for ranking all initiatives. That is the only way to minimize your team’s biases in favor of items or against them.

When Do You Use the MoSCoW Method for Prioritization?

MoSCoW prioritization is effective for teams that want to include representatives from the whole organization in their process. You can capture a broader perspective by involving participants from various functional departments.

Another reason you may want to use MoSCoW prioritization is it allows your team to determine how much effort goes into each category. Therefore, you can ensure you’re delivering a good variety of initiatives in each release.

What Are Best Practices for Using MoSCoW Prioritization?

If you’re considering giving MoSCoW prioritization a try, here are a few steps to keep in mind. Incorporating these into your process will help your team gain more value from the MoSCoW method.

1. Choose an objective ranking or scoring system.

Remember, MoSCoW helps your team group items into the appropriate buckets—from must-have items down to your longer-term wish list. But MoSCoW itself doesn’t help you determine which item belongs in which category.

You will need a separate ranking methodology. You can choose from many, such as:

• Weighted scoring
• Value vs. complexity
• Buy-a-feature
• Opportunity scoring

For help finding the best scoring methodology for your team, check out ProductPlan’s article: 7 strategies to choose the best features for your product .

2. Seek input from all key stakeholders.

To make sure you’re placing each initiative into the right bucket—must-have, should-have, could-have, or won’t-have—your team needs context. 

At the beginning of your MoSCoW method, your team should consider which stakeholders can provide valuable context and insights. Sales? Customer success? The executive staff? Product managers in another area of your business? Include them in your initiative scoring process if you think they can help you see opportunities or threats your team might miss. 

3. Share your MoSCoW process across your organization.

MoSCoW gives your team a tangible way to show your organization prioritizing initiatives for your products or projects. 

The method can help you build company-wide consensus for your work, or at least help you show stakeholders why you made the decisions you did.

Communicating your team’s prioritization strategy also helps you set expectations across the business. When they see your methodology for choosing one initiative over another, stakeholders in other departments will understand that your team has thought through and weighed all decisions you’ve made. 

If any stakeholders have an issue with one of your decisions, they will understand that they can’t simply complain—they’ll need to present you with evidence to alter your course of action.  

Related Terms

2×2 prioritization matrix / Eisenhower matrix / DACI decision-making framework / ICE scoring model / RICE scoring model

Prioritizing your roadmap using our guide

Try productplan free for 14 days, share on mastodon.

Got any suggestions?

We want to hear from you! Send us a message and help improve Slidesgo

Top searches

Trending searches

34 templates

32 templates

31 templates

28 templates

16 templates

35 templates

Travel Guide: Moscow

Travel guide: moscow presentation, free google slides theme and powerpoint template.

Do you know some acquaintances that want to travel to Russia, the biggest country in this planet? Now you can be their own tour guide with this template. Include as much information as possible about tourist attractions, monuments and things to do in Moscow. Let the simplicity of these slides and their cool illustrations speak in favor too!

Features of this template

• 100% editable and easy to modify
• 25 different slides to impress your audience
• Contains easy-to-edit graphics such as graphs, maps, tables, timelines and mockups
• Includes 500+ icons and Flaticon’s extension for customizing your slides
• Designed to be used in Google Slides and Microsoft PowerPoint
• 16:9 widescreen format suitable for all types of screens
• Includes information about fonts, colors, and credits of the free resources used

How can I use the template?

Am I free to use the templates?

How to attribute?

Attribution required If you are a free user, you must attribute Slidesgo by keeping the slide where the credits appear. How to attribute?

Related posts on our blog.

How to Add, Duplicate, Move, Delete or Hide Slides in Google Slides

How to Change Layouts in PowerPoint

How to Change the Slide Size in Google Slides

Related presentations.

Premium template

Unlock this template and gain unlimited access

• Professional Services
• Creative & Design
• See all teams
• Project Management
• Workflow Management
• Task Management
• Resource Management
• See all use cases

Apps & Integrations

• Microsoft Teams
• See all integrations

Explore Wrike

• Book a Demo
• Take a Product Tour
• Start With Templates
• Customer Stories
• ROI Calculator
• Find a Reseller
• Mobile & Desktop Apps
• Cross-Tagging
• Kanban Boards
• Project Resource Planning
• Gantt Charts
• Custom Item Types
• Dynamic Request Forms
• Integrations
• See all features

Learn and connect

• Resource Hub
• Educational Guides

Become Wrike Pro

• Submit A Ticket
• Help Center
• Premium Support
• Community Topics
• Training Courses
• Facilitated Services
• Productivity

A Quick Guide to the MoSCoW Method Technique

January 12, 2022 - 10 min read

The MoSCoW method is a prioritization technique used by project and campaign managers to work smarter not harder. In this quick guide, we’ll explain exactly what the MoSCoW method is, how it works, and provide some examples you can use to inform your own analysis. Keep reading to better understand the various categories within the MoSCoW method, as well as an alternative prioritization tool for project managers.

What is the MoSCow method?

The MoSCoW method is a technique used by organizations to communicate the importance and priority of the various requirements being met in various projects. This method is also referred to as MoSCoW prioritization and MoSCoW analysis.

The term MoSCoW is an acronym that refers to the first letter of each of the four priority categories. It uses four categories, which are must-have, should-want, could-have, and will not have. While it’s meant to be used at the start of a project when time is on your side, it can also be adapted to work seamlessly for time constraints .

Software developer Dai Clegg originally created the MoScoW method. Since then, many other leading companies have used it to get their team on the same page, properly distribute resources, and achieve project goals. 

How does the MoSCow technique work?

The MoSCoW technique works by allowing teams to include multiple representatives from the organization in their project management discussions. This gives everyone a wider perspective on the organization's operations and where their collective priorities lie. 

Before you begin your MoSCoW method, think about which people can provide valuable context for your team. They can help you identify opportunities and threats, and they can help you make better decisions. Once finalized, the MoSCoW method will also force stakeholders to show evidence before they can submit additional work requests mid-project. 

Critics of MoSCoW often say that it does not include a comprehensive objective scoring system for all initiatives. This is a common mistake that many teams make. A weighted scoring method will more accurately measure the backlog against a set of predefined benefits and costs.

One of the most challenging aspects of the MoSCoW technique is learning which categories their initiatives should go in.  As the manager, you will need to know which of your team's initiatives are “must haves” for their product or which are merely “should haves”. 

You may even need to solicit feedback from a different department in order to get greater perspective on your current project prioritization. For example, a marketing department head may have greater insight into which selling points for your upcoming product launch are resonating more with buyers so that you can work on perfecting those components first. 

Another key idea about how the MoSCoW technique works is that it’s only effective if you follow it. This means that, once an initiative is placed into a category, the entire team needs to stick to that decision. Many beginner MoSCoW teams end up agreeing that an initiative should have been initiated, but they move on to the next step instead because it feels better or more familiar to them. 

Finally, when it comes to making decisions about prioritization, your team will need to have a consistent framework in place before you engage with this technique. A consistent framework for assessing and ranking all initiatives is critical if you want to avoid biases and falling into old patterns. 

Your team’s prioritization strategy helps set expectations across the organization. It lets them know that they have made the right decisions and weigh all the factors that go into making those decisions. Don’t be afraid to make your MoSCoW method results available to the rest of your organization if applicable. 

Understanding MoSCow prioritization categories

Before the MoSCoW analysis can begin, all participants need to agree on which initiatives will be prioritized. It's important to discuss how to resolve disagreements in order to prevent them from holding up progress during this preparation stage. This can help prevent issues from happening in the first place.

Once the framework has been established, it is time to start identifying the appropriate categories for each project. Here are the definitions and explanations of each of the MoSCoW prioritization categories: 

Musts are defined as initiatives that are critical to the success of a project or product. These are usually non-negotiable and can be used to describe specific functionalities or solutions that need to be implemented.

The “must have” category is challenging to define. Before you start, ask yourself if something is truly necessary in this category.

Should have

Although “should have” initiatives are not essential to a product or project, they may add significant value. A “should have” initiative is different from a “must have” initiative, which means it can be scheduled for a future release.

“Could haves” are initiatives that are not necessary to the core of a product. Projects that are placed in the “could have” category are often the first ones to be deprioritized when another project takes longer than expected.

Will not have

The MoSCoW method places several initiatives in a “will not have” category. This method allows you to manage expectations about what will not be included in a release or another timeframe.

Putting initiatives in the “will not have" category can help prevent scope creep . This category shows the team that the project is not a priority at this specific time frame. 

Some initiatives are prioritized in the “will not have” group, while others are likely to happen in the future. Some teams then decide to create a subcategory for these initiatives.

How is the MoSCoW method used in project management?

The concept of MoSCoW allows project managers to prioritize tasks that can be done efficiently even when they have limited time. For example, if the team has a tight budget, it can use MoSCoW to determine which initiatives can be completed within those limitations. 

This is especially useful for managers juggling more than project or leading cross-functional teams. This is because cross-functional teams are sometimes obligated to another company or department’s priorities. While your team is working on a new product release, another project manager may have them on a tight timeline for another client’s goal. 

And, as we all know, things come up throughout the lifespan of a project. Although efficient planning helps teams remain agile, the MoSCoW method can make even the biggest and most unexpected roadblocks more manageable. 

MoSCoW examples

This method can be used for nearly any industry or project type because it has to do more with project decision-making than the subject matter itself. Here are a couple of MoSCoW method examples you can use to get started with your first draft: 

1. National College of Ireland’s website project

In this example from a lecture on the MoSCoW analysis, Professor Eugene O’Loughlin demonstrates how to use this technique when building a website . 

The project goal in this example is to create a platform where users can securely log in and access files. Because of this, the tasks listed under their MoSCoW categories will look different from other standard website creation projects. 

For example, while another project may add “have an eye-catching design” to their should-have section, this particular website has added “password retrieval” because it directly applies to their security-oriented goal. 

Even if this website project could benefit from a great design, the MoSCoW method helps managers and teams laser focus on completing the highest priority activities first. If they have more time later on, they can potentially add a design improvement task to their “could haves” if they determine the ROI is high enough. 

Takeaway: Consider your project holistically when assigning priority. Your goals should be your north star for determining what is or is not truly important, regardless of what conventional wisdom says to do. 

2. Slideteam’s Assessing HR Requirements Template

This is one of the MoSCoW examples that shows how many different types of tasks this technique covers. Here, we see storing employee leave history as a must, leave letter printing a should, notifications for pending leave dates a could, and remote access a won’t. 

In HR, many of their decisions around prioritization will be made by compliance and legal counsel that they must adhere to. Still, it’s important to define these tasks and their MoSCoW label so that employees understand at a glance that it’s less important to set up leave notifications and more important that they update employment histories in their software. 

Takeaway: The MoSCoW method can be used to cover many different aspects of projects including compliance and procedure. 

How to undertake a MoSCoW analysis using Wrike

Wrike is a project management software that allows users to strategize how they prioritize their portfolio of projects as well as the tasks within each individual initiative. Using visual tools such as road maps that show what progress will look like from kickoff to completion, managers can easily see which of their chosen MoSCoW analysis configurations work best for achieving their goals. 

Wrike also allows you to centralize all of your project planning in one central location. You can view potential resource conflicts across projects, individual task progress statuses, and automate tasks from your should or could have categories that you otherwise wouldn’t have time for. 

Ready to get started with the MoSCoW method and Wrike? Sign up for a two-week free trial today. 

Maria Waida

Maria is a freelance content writer who specializes in blogging and other marketing materials for enterprise software businesses.

Related articles

An Introduction to Bullet Journal Project Management

Bullet journals are great tools to destress and organize various aspects of project management. In this guide, we’re diving deep into the pros and cons of using this method to organize projects of all kinds. Keep reading to discover what bullet journal project management is and how this practice can boost productivity to new levels.  What is a bullet journal? A bullet journal is a customized space to organize all of your personal projects and goals. It can also be used to track deadlines and prioritize tasks. Bullet journaling became popular thanks to the book Getting Things Done, which is about a project management technique that uses a bullet journal to manage different projects efficiently. Bullet journals are often used to create daily, weekly, and monthly project plans. They can also be home to your to-do lists, inspiration boards, and project notes. They’re relaxing to create and relatively easy to maintain.  If you have multiple projects to manage, then you may want to use more than one notebook. Or you can swap your physical journal for a professional services management software that has plenty of space for storing digital plans.  Software tools are also easy to customize, make collaboration easier, and help with turning the plan into reality through task creation and assignment tools. With Wrike, data from multiple users will automatically sync so that everyone is on the same page with new updates and responsibilities.  If you do use a physical journal, using loose leaf paper in a binder will allow you to add pages as you go. This is useful for keeping track of all the data in one place instead of switching to additional notebooks when you run out of room.  There are many elegant, decorated bullet journal page layouts out there. Many invest time into making them artistic with drawings, decorative tape, and cut-out images. This isn’t necessary for project management, but it may be a fun activity outside of work.  Bullet journals can use several different layouts. The most common is a two-page spread that includes a month-long calendar on one page and a breakdown of goals for that period on the other. The latter will help you keep track of all the dates and commitments that are important to you as you get closer to starting a new project. The two-page spread makes it easy to see where you'll be working most efficiently in the coming weeks. It's ideal for people who manage multiple projects simultaneously. You can also create a view of the next six months within your bullet journal project management layout. This is called a future log. A future log is a calendar that lets you keep track of important events and dates for long-term projects. How do you use a bullet journal in project planning? Projects are essentially collections of notes and tasks that are linked to a common goal. They can be pulled together in a bullet journal for you to easily see all of the work related to that specific project. To start, you’ll need to list out your goals.  Create a list that includes every project goal you or your team can think of. Sort them in order of importance. Ideally, these smaller project goals will align with your organization’s big-picture goals.  Once you know what you’d like to accomplish, you can begin your bullet journal. Start by breaking down your number one goal into a project action plan. This can span days, weeks, or months. Then, break down your project action plan into individual tasks. Determine what the task is, who will be in charge of getting it done, and when it needs to be completed.  After that, you’re ready to use your bullet journal for project planning.  Step 1: List out your sections Number your pages if they aren’t already. At the beginning of the bullet journal, write the name of the page on the left side and the page number on the right.  Step 2: Add your key You may use symbols and abbreviations throughout your project planning. Put these at the beginning of the journal either after or on the same page as your key. Use color coding to signify which symbols belong to each project if you have more than one.  Step 3: Write out your future log A future log is a list of key dates and tasks that aren’t part of your immediate three-to-six month plans but are important to keep in mind. Add this after your key and leave space for other items as they come up.  Step 4: Create your calendar This can be in the form of a traditional calendar page. Some people like to hand draw them. However, you can also print, cut out, and paste a blank monthly calendar page into your journal too.  Step 5: Track tasks Create sections for monthly, weekly, and daily task lists. You can organize these in a few ways. Some project managers prefer to do it by project or by person. You can also create one massive list with everything you’re personally responsible for so you have it all in one place. Or use a combination of any of these for your various projects.  Make sure to check in with your bullet journal weekly and monthly. Note any upcoming or past deadlines. Adjust your task list and schedule for unexpected issues as needed.  The benefits of using a bullet journal for work Project managers often have a hard time keeping track of their work activities without losing track of anything along the way. This is one of the reasons why the bullet journal is so useful. Not only does it give you a roadmap of your next projects, but it’s also good for daily use.  You can keep track of to-do lists, priorities, and daily reflections. You can also journal about your progress and realign with goals all in the same notebook or tool. You can also rapidly log your thoughts for the day to boost your creativity and clear out emotions that no longer serve the project.  Combine your bullet journal for work with your personal goals. It will be easier to prioritize and accurately schedule tasks when you have your entire life laid out in front of you on paper.  Another benefit of using a bullet journal for work is that you can either DIY a notebook or use a planner you already have. It’s not so much what you use but how you use it.  And bonus: bullet journaling only takes five to 15 minutes a day. Whether it’s reviewing tomorrow’s meetings or crossing off today’s tasks, a bullet journal practice is easy to build into your schedule no matter how busy you are.  The disadvantages of using a bullet journal in project management While bullet journaling project management is great for keeping track of key project details, many project managers need a separate system to manage their meetings and reports.  Having more than one journal or calendar to manage at one time can be confusing. Add more than one project to the mix, and it may be counterproductive to use a traditional pen and paper bullet journal to accomplish your goals.  Another disadvantage of using a bullet journal in project management is your lack of ability to collaborate with others. When writing on paper, you have to either show your team the notebook in person or scan the pages and share them online. Either way, it’s not ideal for large, remote, and/or revolving teams.  The other thing to know about bullet journaling before diving in headfirst is that it can be quite time-consuming. If you do a crafty layout with calligraphy and scrapbooking accessories, then it may even take several days to finish.  And once you do have your plans laid out, they can be hard to change. Rewriting, erasing, and making more space for things that come up are essential for project planning. For that reason, we suggest using an 11 inch by 7 inch grid lined notebook to give yourself extra space.  Also, you can outline headlines and calendars with a pen or marker if you like the look. But stick to pencil for any factual information that is subject to change throughout the lifetime of the project. If you don’t do this now, you may end up having to scrap entire pages and start over later on.  Bullet journal alternatives you should consider Bullet journals are fun, unique, and creative. But there are some projects where they just aren’t the best possible option for managing it all. The project may be too complex or too large for a single notebook. There may even be so many updates needed that a physical notebook doesn’t make sense for your project.  If you’re facing any of these issues, you can try any of the following bullet journal alternatives:  Digital calendar and list app combo Bulletin board, sticky notes, and shared files Project management software Project management software is the top choice for bullet journal alternatives. Not only is it flexible, but it can make project planning more productive.  Wrike is the ultimate platform for customizing your own bullet journal project management processes. With over 30 predefined apps you can use to sync all your project data in one place, it's the most versatile platform for managing complex tasks. As a single source of truth for a project, team, and entire organization, project management software offers more advanced features than a simple notebook can. Instead of writing everything down on a few sheets of paper, Wrike acts like a living document. And unlike other digital organization tools, Wrike is specifically built to optimize project performance and success.  Wrike's tools are designed to work seamlessly with any team. Anyone who has permission to access the project can share files and tasks quickly and easily. Once uploaded, collaborators can visually edit and obtain files.  They’ll also have access to reports and tasks that are simple to understand at a glance without losing the details in the process. This allows all managers to gain visibility across departments and groups. Wrike is the ideal solution for teams that want to grow and operate efficiently with the help of cutting edge technology. For example, Wrike’s Work Intelligence helps you get started with the next generation of work, with AI-powered projects and automation. Wrike also features a streamlined UI that lets you customize its features to work seamlessly with your team. Although bullet journaling allows you to customize your project planning, you’ll be able to get and implement feedback from partners faster with a digital project tool.  Here are some other stand out benefits of using a project management software over a physical or digital bullet journal:  It’s interactive. For example, Wrike offers Gantt charts that lets users visualize their plans and progress. It’s efficient. Kanban boards make it easy to work seamlessly with Agile teams by creating and sharing whenever needed.  It’s faster. Wrike's template library is designed to help you quickly create and manage complex projects. It’s customizable. With custom request forms, you can easily gather details for your intake, assign tasks to the right teams, and dynamically route questions and requests. It’s up to date. Wrike’s calendars are ideal for team members who want to keep up with the latest information. It’s repeatable. Most tasks go through the same steps before they are finished. In a project management solution, you build a path for yours that will automatically assign and notify people when it's ready to begin through Wrike’s Automation Engine.  It’s trackable. With timers, approvals, and visual task assignments, you can manage entire teams while streamlining your work. It’s transparent. Get a 360 view across all of your organizations with custom dashboards. It’s syncable. Wrike's 400+ app integrations make it possible to integrate hundreds of apps into one central hub.  It’s safe. A digital project management software can safeguard your data by enforcing rules and encryption key ownership. Ready to upgrade your project planning methods and tools? Check out Wrike’s two-week free trial for some more goal-achieving features. 

What Is The Pomodoro Technique and How Does it Work?

Endless tasks and expectations from colleagues and employers can make getting things done hard. There’s always something else to add to your to-do list and, as that list grows, it starts to feel like there’s never enough time to do it all. Productivity hacks can seem gimmicky and semi-helpful at best. But what if there was a time management strategy that could help you tackle your to-do list, meet others’ expectations, and help you feel more productive and balanced?  That’s where the Pomodoro Technique comes in. This popular time management strategy can help you better plan your workload, overcome distractions, and check tasks off your list. And it doesn’t require working overtime or jamming more work into your day. Instead, it encourages frequent breaks in between stints of work. Perhaps one of the best aspects about it is that it’s easy to use.  We’re here to help you make your workdays better and more productive. In this guide, we’re breaking down the Pomodoro method — how to use it, why it works, and its advantages and disadvantages. And don’t worry, we’ll cover what Pomodoro means while we’re at it. Add reading this guide to your list of to-dos for today, and let’s get started.  What is the Pomodoro Technique? The Pomodoro Technique is a productivity or time management method created in the early 1990s by Francesco Cirillo.  A university student at the time, Cirillo struggled to focus and get his assignments done. Feeling overwhelmed, he realized he needed to try a new way of working and held himself accountable for committing to 10 minutes of focused time while studying. As he committed to the challenge, he found a tomato-shaped timer (you guessed it, Pomodoro is “tomato” in Italian), and the Pomodoro Technique was born. Cirillo wrote an entire book about the Pomodoro Technique, but the gist of it is simple. The method encourages short bursts of manageable chunks of work with breaks built in between. With this method, you work for 25-minutes sessions separated by five-minute breaks. After every four or five Pomodoros (think of these as work sessions), you indulge in a more extended break for 15-20 minutes. With a sense of urgency built into it, the method forces you to think through your to-do list and eliminate distractions while progressing on your tasks for a limited amount of time. And you can eliminate distractions knowing that you have breaks built into your day to look forward to. Let’s start by understanding what exactly the word “Pomodoro” means and where it came from. What does Pomodoro mean? Pomodoro quite literally means “tomato” in Italian. But what does a tomato have to do with time management?  Like we mentioned earlier, Cirillo used a tomato-shaped timer to help him manage his focused work time. He later named his famous technique after the tomato-shaped kitchen timer that helped him do his best work.  When we talk about the Pomodoro Technique, a Pomodoro also refers to one 25-minute focused work session. You’ll use a timer to work for one Pomodoro. Get it? Don’t worry — we’ll walk you through the nitty-gritty of how to use the Pomodoro Technique next.  How to use the Pomodoro Technique One of the best parts of the Pomodoro Technique is that it’s super simple to use without any training. Depending on who you ask, these steps may vary slightly. But that’s one of the best parts about the method — you can customize it.  Here’s how Cirillo’s Pomodoro method works: 1. Make a list of the tasks you need to accomplish To make the best use of your Pomodoro sessions, consider starting your day by creating a to-do list and outlining the tasks you need to accomplish. Don’t panic if your list becomes lengthy! Remember, you’re going to split up your work so that it’s more manageable throughout the day. You just need to make a note of what you need to accomplish today.  Tip: When you make a list of your tasks, think about how much time you need to complete each task. For example, one task might take you a full 25-minute Pomodoro. Or you might have three short tasks that you can group during one Pomodoro. Write down how many minutes each task will take. That way, you can pair up tasks that will take less than 25-minutes to complete. Your estimations don’t have to be perfect, but you want to avoid having gaps of time to fill or going past time during your Pomodoro sessions. 2. Set a timer for 25 minutes You don’t have to mimic Cirillo exactly and use a tomato-shaped kitchen timer, but to live the complete Pomodoro Technique experience, give a real timer a try. It doesn’t matter if you use a virtual or physical timer; any will do. Here are a few options to choose from when selecting a Pomodoro Technique timer: Pomodoro tomato timer Online tomato timer Focus Keeper app Pomodoro Timer Lite app The timer you use doesn’t need to be overly cumbersome or have any fancy capabilities, so don’t get caught up in the details. Keep it simple to make it most effective.  3. Focus on your tasks until the timer goes off This is the tricky part. Once you’ve set your timer, you need to work on the task or tasks you’ve chosen for 25 minutes without any interruptions throwing you off track. Combating distractions is no easy feat, and it may take practice to nail this step.  Tip: If possible, alert those around you when you’re using the Pomodoro method. This can help reduce interruptions and external distractions.  If you find yourself with spare time during a Pomodoro and aren’t sure what to focus on, Cirillo recommends taking advantage of the opportunity for overlearning. Use the time to make improvements and tidy up your work, reflect on the tasks you completed, or make a note of what you’ve learned until the timer goes off. Use the 25 minutes as best you can and avoid starting your break early if possible. 4. Enjoy a short break for five minutes You made it! Time is up and you can enjoy a break for five minutes or so. Consider using this time to use the restroom, grab a snack, or fill up your water bottle. Give your eyes a break and try to limit screen time if you can. Get up and stretch your legs or move your body around. Taking care of your well-being will help you stay motivated throughout the remainder of the day. 5. Repeat steps the first four steps Are you getting the hang of it? Rinse and repeat the above steps. After you’ve completed four Pomodoros, skip step four and jump straight to step six. 6. After every four or five Pomodoros, enjoy a more extended break You’ve earned it! Enjoy a longer, restorative break this time. Take 15-20 minutes to rejuvenate yourself. Maybe it’s time for breakfast or lunch. Or perhaps you want to spend a few minutes outside in the sun. Whatever the case may be, use your break wisely and prepare to jump into more Pomodoros after the break. That’s it. The Pomodoro Technique is an easy-to-use system, which means there isn’t much of a learning curve to start using it to your advantage. Does the Pomodoro Technique work? It sounds simple, right? That means you might be asking yourself whether the Pomodoro method truly works or not.  Reviews of the method spread amongst the internet suggest that many have seen success when using the technique. One person found that the Pomodoro Technique was a great solution for monotonous tasks on the to-do list. Knowing that they only needed to work on a task for 25 minutes encouraged them to get started on those dreaded, tedious to-do’s. Another person found success using the Pomodoro Technique and later adapted the method to fit their specific needs. The Pomodoro Technique helped them define a practice of self-discipline to expand on and boost productivity.  But what is it about the Pomodoro Technique that makes it work? Studies suggest that brief mental breaks help keep you focused. Frequent distractions rob us of productivity at work, but the Pomodoro method helps eliminate distractions for more focus in the workplace.  As with any time management strategy, what works best for some may not work well for others. Give the Pomodoro Technique a try and tailor it to your individual needs to ensure it has the most payoff for you.  The advantages and disadvantages of the Pomodoro method As with any time management strategy, the Pomodoro Technique has both benefits and drawbacks to consider before experimenting with it. Let’s take a look at both, starting with the advantages. Advantages of the Pomodoro Technique Break the habit of multitasking  When you follow the Pomodoro Technique, you’ll break the habit of multitasking. While multitasking might seem like a great way to get more done, it’s distracting and actually hinders your productivity. With the Pomodoro method, your goal is to dedicate your focus to any given task at hand — and save the rest of the items on your to-do list for another Pomodoro.  Reduce or prevent feelings of burnout Looking at your neverending to-do list can feel overwhelming and stressful, and working through that list without a strategic plan in place can cause feelings of burnout. The Pomodoro Technique not only encourages frequent breaks but it builds them directly into your schedule for you. You can reduce or prevent stress and burnout by taking full advantage of your breaks when you have them. Reduce procrastination We all procrastinate now and then, but the Pomodoro Technique ignites a sense of urgency in the day, which reduces or eliminates procrastination. There isn’t any time to scroll through your favorite social media platform, grab another snack, stare out the window, or engage in another distraction when you know you only have 25 minutes to complete a task. (Don’t beat yourself up — we’re all guilty of these things!) Disadvantages of the Pomodoro Technique Some tasks take more than 25 minutes  The Pomodoro method is said to be beneficial for tasks like writing, coding, and studying. It also comes in handy when needing to work through some monotonous to-dos like cleaning out your inbox or digging into some administrative items. But some tasks are bound to take more than 25 minutes to complete, which means the Pomodoro Technique may not always work for every type of project or task. If you’re in the middle of a project and are in a solid flow state, you might want to keep working past the 25-minute timer mark, which will interrupt all subsequent Pomodoro scheduling. You know your work styles and productivity best, so you’ll be in charge of making the judgment call on whether you need to work past the timer’s buzz.  Meetings could interfere with your Pomodoro planning  The Pomodoro method sounds particularly beneficial to those who have full control over their schedules. But many career professionals are bound to be interrupted by planned and unexpected meetings. Your meeting schedule could interfere with how you plan your Pomodoros or could interrupt you in the middle of a Pomodoro session.  Every time management strategy comes with advantages and disadvantages, and no method is guaranteed to be one-size-fits-all. Since the Pomodoro method is easy and comes without cost, consider giving it a try to see if it works for you. Remember, you can always tweak it to suit you best.  How to use Wrike to plan your Pomodoros  To set yourself up for success when using the Pomodoro Technique, you’ll want to have a to-do list prepared. A project management tool like Wrike can help you organize your tasks so that you can dive right into your Pomodoros (without wondering what you should start with).  With Wrike, you can: Manage and prioritize your work Use templates to organize and break your projects down into manageable tasks Track your time to understand how you’re spending it Manage workloads with resource management capabilities  You’re on your way to a more productive workday. Start your free trial of Wrike and begin planning your Pomodoros today.

Moore’s Law and the Productivity Problem

As the year draws to a close, developing strategies for how to be more productive and finish the year off strong is on every team’s mind — regardless of department or industry.  According to a study by California-based management platform Redbooth, the month of the year that we are at our most productive is October, followed by November, then September. The fall provides a feeling of a new start for many businesses, with the desire for shiny new productivity tools and aids bringing us back to our school days. But, while a new pencil case or a multi-colored pen can work wonders, today’s organizations are looking to much more sophisticated tools to boost their productivity. Note-taking apps, instant messaging platforms, virtual to-do lists, calendar tools — our desktops are overflowing with software designed to make us our most productive selves. But, with so many conflicting apps clouding our vision, it can often be difficult to get anything done at all.  So, why are we so inclined to constantly invest in new technology, believing it will exponentially increase our productivity levels? This concept is commonly referred to as Moore’s Law, and it’s important to understand it if you’re concerned about your team’s or your own productivity levels. What is Moore’s Law? Let’s start off with a simple enough question: what is Moore’s Law? The origins of Moore’s Law lie in IT and computer hardware. It is the principle that the speed and efficiency of a computer can be expected to double every two years, while the cost decreases by half. Moore’s Law is named after Gordon E. Moore, the co-founder of Intel, who made this observation of exponential growth in 1965.  You will have no doubt experienced Moore’s Law for yourself over the last decade, as the need to purchase a new phone or laptop normally begins to creep up every two years or so. While the technical capabilities of your gadget will have grown hugely, the price largely remains standard. We then begin to fall into a cycle of purchasing new technology as a habit, stretching our view to include phones, computers, exercise aids, entertainment systems, and, yes, productivity tools. Moore’s Law and endless productivity tools Of course, Moore’s Law has huge benefits for the technologically-driven society that we live in. The standards of the technology that we rely on can even be linked to Moore’s Law. The overarching idea of Moore’s Law — that speed, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of technology is constantly evolving at a rapid pace — could apply to productivity tools and solutions. The need to update and reinvest in the ever-growing ecosystem of productivity tools and software every few years sees many teams losing themselves to too many apps.  In 2015, the average number of cloud applications per company was 73. In 2020, that number had increased to 163. So much so, that 56% of IT executives are now reporting having to use manual spreadsheets to keep track of all their SaaS apps — defeating their productivity goals before they’ve even started. This concept is commonly known as ‘SaaS sprawl,’ a term that refers to the dilemma of an organization’s tech stack being so expansive that it becomes unmanageable and causes visibility problems across departments. $40 billion is estimated to be spent on unused software each year, and the number of apps we are downloading continues to rise.  Many teams believe themselves to be more productive than ever, when really, spending so much time flicking between apps, tools, and software stifles creativity and raises burnout to an all-time high. How your team can effectively invest in productivity If your organization has fallen foul to overindulgence in productivity tools and gadgets, don’t worry. There are plenty of ways to empower your teams and teach them how to be more productive without overwhelming themselves with dozens of productivity platforms.  Consider toxic productivity The concept of toxic productivity relates to an unattainable desire for increased productivity, at the expense of other priorities, such as family or health. Toxic productivity is a real issue for many teams, especially if both our personal and work devices are overrun with technology that is constantly drawing us back to working mode. Consider whether your team could benefit from a digital detox of work-related technology, and set boundaries for after-hours work communication. Turn your attention to other methods of increasing productivity There are plenty of ways to increase productivity and wellbeing at work that have nothing to do with technology. For example, has your organization invested in a flexible work structure, allowing employees to choose where they work best? Could your business go the extra mile and trial a four-day workweek? Could your employee recognition programs use some extra love? These are all areas to consider when brainstorming how to be more productive across the board. Making the most of all-in-one technology like Wrike Of course, technology will always be a cornerstone of a successful business, and continuing to use productivity tools in some way at work is non-negotiable. But which tools should you invest in? What are the most important features of work management software that can actually increase productivity by up to 40%? Workflow automation: With Wrike’s custom request forms and automated task assignment, your team will never miss important tasks and details because of a cluttered workspace. App integration: Using so many apps can be tiresome and inefficient, with details and updates often being missed by team members. Wrike’s work management includes over 400 app integrations, so the constant context switching can stop. Single source of truth: Trawling through emails and messaging apps to find important documents and updates is time-consuming and frustrating for teams. Keeping everything organized in one centralized hub, where users can comment, edit, and give feedback, is a life-saver for teams who wish to be more productive. Collaborative features: Whether your team works in-office, remotely, or under a hybrid model, breakdowns in communication are one of the most common challenges to successful projects. Wrike’s collaborative features, including @mentions, real-time editing, and email and chat app integrations means that your team all have the same view, no matter where they are. Want to know more about how Wrike can boost your team’s productivity? Try out a free two-week trial today.

Get weekly updates in your inbox!

You are now subscribed to wrike news and updates.

Let us know what marketing emails you are interested in by updating your email preferences here .

Sorry, this content is unavailable due to your privacy settings. To view this content, click the “Cookie Preferences” button and accept Advertising Cookies there.

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 9 min read

The MoSCoW Method

Understanding project priorities.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

(Also Known As MoSCoW Prioritization and MoSCoW Analysis)

You probably use some form of prioritized To-Do List to manage your daily tasks. But what happens when you're heading up a project that has various stakeholders, each of whom has a different opinion about the importance of different requirements? How do you identify the priority of each task, and communicate that to team members, stakeholders and customers alike?

This is when it's useful to apply a prioritizing tool such as the MoSCoW method. This simple project-management approach helps you, your team, and your stakeholders agree which tasks are critical to a project's success. It also highlights those tasks that can be abandoned if deadlines or resources are threatened.

In this article, we'll examine how you can use the MoSCoW method to prioritize project tasks more efficiently, and ensure that everyone expects the same things.

What Is the MoSCoW Method?

The MoSCoW method was developed by Dai Clegg of Oracle® UK Consulting in the mid-1990s. It's a useful approach for sorting project tasks into critical and non-critical categories.

MoSCoW stands for:

• Must – "Must" requirements are essential to the project's success, and are non-negotiable. If these tasks are missing or incomplete, the project is deemed a failure.
• Should – "Should" items are critical, high-priority tasks that you should complete whenever possible. These are highly important, but can be delivered in a second phase of the project if absolutely necessary.
• Could – "Could" jobs are highly desirable but you can leave them out if there are time or resource constraints.
• Would (or "Won't") – These tasks are desirable (for example, "Would like to have…") but aren't included in this project. You can also use this category for the least critical activities.

The "o"s in MoSCoW are just there to make the acronym pronounceable.

Terms from Clegg, D. and Barker, R. (1994). ' CASE Method Fast-Track: A RAD Approach ,' Amsterdam: Addison-Wesley, 1994. Copyright © Pearson Education Limited. Reproduced with permission.

People often use the MoSCoW method in Agile Project Management . However, you can apply it to any type of project.

MoSCoW helps you manage the scope of your project so that it isn't overwhelmingly large. It is particularly useful when you're working with multiple stakeholders, because it helps everyone agree on what's critical and what is not. The four clearly labeled categories allow people to understand a task's priority easily, which eliminates confusion, misunderstanding, conflict, and disappointment.

For example, some project management tools sort tasks into "high-," "medium-," and "low-" priority categories. But members of the team might have different opinions about what each of these groupings means. And all too often, tasks are labeled "high" priority because everything seems important. This can put a strain on time and resources, and ultimately lead to the project failing.

Using the MoSCoW Method

Follow the steps below to get the most from the MoSCoW method. (This describes using MoSCoW in a conventional "waterfall" project, however the approach is similar with agile projects.)

Step 1: Organize Your Project

It's important that you and your team fully understand your objectives before starting the project.

Write a business case to define your project's goals, its scope and timeline, and exactly what you will deliver. You can also draw up a project charter to plan how you'll approach it.

Next, conduct a stakeholder analysis to identify key people who are involved in the project and to understand how its success will benefit each of them.

Step 2: Write out Your Task List

Once you understand your project's objectives, carry out a Gap Analysis to identify what needs to happen for you to meet your goals.

Step 3: Prioritize Your Task List

Next, work with your stakeholders to prioritize these tasks into the four MoSCoW categories: Must, Should, Could, and Would (or Won't). These conversations can often be "difficult," so brush up on your conflict resolution, group decision making and negotiating skills beforehand!

Rather than starting with all tasks in the Must category and then demoting some of them, it can be helpful to put every task in the Would category first, and then discuss why individual ones deserve to move up the list.

Step 4: Challenge the MoSCoW List

Once you've assigned tasks to the MoSCoW categories, critically challenge each classification.

Be particularly vigilant about which items make it to the Must list. Remember, it is reserved solely for tasks that would result in the project failing if they're not done.

Aim to keep the Must list below 60 percent of the team's available time and effort. The fewer items you have, the higher your chance of success.

Try to reach consensus with everyone in the group. If you can't, you then need to bring in a key decision-maker who has the final say.

Step 5: Communicate Deliverables

Your last step is to share the prioritized list with team members, key stakeholders and customers.

It's important that you communicate the reasons for each categorization, particularly with Must items. Encourage people to discuss any concerns until people fully understand the reasoning.

Zhen is a project manager for a large IT organization. She's working with a team of designers, marketers and developers to redesign a large corporate client's website.

At the initial meeting, each group has strong opinions about which tasks are most important to the project's success, and no one wants to give up their "high priority" objective.

For example, the marketing team is adamant that the new website should gather visitors' personal information, for use in future marketing campaigns.

Meanwhile, the designers are arguing that, while this is important, the site may be more successful if it had a professionally produced streaming video. They also want a feed streaming onto the website's home page from the client's social networking accounts.

The developers counter that the current prototype design won't translate well onto mobile devices, so the top priority is retrofitting the site so people can view it on these.

Zhen can see that, while each priority is important, they're not all critical to the project's success. She decides to use the MoSCoW method to help the group reach consensus on which task is truly "mission critical."

She starts with a key question: "If I came to you the night before rollout and the following task was not done, would you cancel the project?" This question helped everyone in the group drill down to the project's most important priority.

The group finally agreed on the following priorities:

• Must – The retrofit website must be easily viewable on mobile devices.
• Should – There should be a social networking stream included.
• Could – There could be a streaming video on the site to help users.
• Would – Personal information would be gathered for future marketing efforts, but not on this occasion.

The MoSCoW method helped everyone agree on what was truly important for the project's final success.

The MoSCoW method is a simple and highly useful approach that enables you to prioritize project tasks as critical and non-critical. MoSCoW stands for:

• Must – These are tasks that you must complete for the project to be considered a success.
• Should – These are critical activities that are less urgent than Must tasks.
• Could – These items can be taken off the list if time or resources are limited.
• Would – These are tasks that would be nice to have, but can be done at a later date.

The benefit of the MoSCoW approach is that it makes it easy for team members and key stakeholders to understand how important a task is for a project's success.

Apply This to Your Life

Try using the MoSCoW method to prioritize your daily tasks. Look at what you completed at the end of the day. Did prioritizing enable you to get more done?

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

How to use burndown charts.

Keeping Your Projects on Track

Kanban Boards

Managing the Delivery of Your Projects

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

Team Management

Learn the key aspects of managing a team, from building and developing your team, to working with different types of teams, and troubleshooting common problems.

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Newest Releases

SWOT Analysis

How to Build a Strong Culture in a Distributed Team

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

Top tips for delegating.

Delegate work to your team members effectively with these top tips

Ten Dos and Don'ts of Change Conversations

Tips for tackling discussions about change

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Conflict management.

With Peter A Glaser and Susan R Glaser

Expert Interviews

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

Home PowerPoint Templates Models MoSCoW Method PowerPoint Template

MoSCoW Method PowerPoint Template

The MoSCoW Method PowerPoint Template is a matrix presentation of prioritizing technique. It is a business analysis concept use in project management and product development processes. The project development team works with all stakeholders to analyze importance of multiple deliverables. This placement of deliverables based on priority is known as MoSCoW method. Further, the term MoSCow is an acronym for Must have, Should Have, Could Have, Won’t Have). These are the four priority categories with additional O’s to make pronounceable terminology.

The MoSCoW method PowerPoint provides an eye-catching layout of 4 category segments. Each of these segments further displays the progress status of activity line. The status types include Complete, in progress, and not yet started. These three status are symbols derived from Harvey balls concept chart Therefore, the users can change these activity status symbols as see fit.

The MoSCoW Method PowerPoint Template helps present the immediate business benefits to the audience. Because this template highlights the most important deliverables that client can expect to receive first. For example, the Must have and Should have processes are priority initially. But tasks in Could have and Won’t have categories may also change according to time. The MoSCow method basically enables stakeholders to understand impact of priorities on performance and speed.

MoSCoW priority model present following processes and activities under each category.

• Must have : Critical to current delivery timebox .
• Should have : Important but not necessary for current delivery timebox.
• Could have : If there are time and resources available to improve user experience.
• Won’t have : Least critical deliverables that are not appropriate for current delivery time.

You must be logged in to download this file.

Favorite Add to Collection

Details (2 slides)

Supported Versions:

Subscribe today and get immediate access to download our PowerPoint templates.

Related PowerPoint Templates

Polygonal Venn Diagram

Simple Status Report PowerPoint Template

After Action Report PowerPoint Template

Customer Benefits from Deliverables PowerPoint Template

Where Thought Leaders go for Growth

Sort Tasks With the MoSCoW Prioritization Method (+ PDF Template)

Table of contents, what is the moscow prioritization method, what are the advantages of the moscow method, m: must have, s: should have, c: could have, w: won’t have…, free moscow prioritization matrix template, limits & alternatives to the moscow method, prioritization is key to meeting expectations.

Defining the scope and features of a project is vital in project management . The proper definition of these key characteristics of the deliverables of the project allows your project team to focus on a well-defined goal and vision . Furthermore, time shouldn't be wasted on useless features to keep the project within the deadlines.

The MoSCoW prioritization method is a useful tool to sort through the requirements of a project and determine which features should be implemented in the final release or product. Learning how to use this framework could save you time and efforts , while preserving the quality and focus of your project.

Keep reading to learn more about how to use the MoSCoW analysis , with its pros, cons and alternatives . And to top it all off, other useful matrices often used in agile project management are discussed below.

Just like other agile tools (such as SCAMPER ), this method is based on a mnemonic: the term MoSCoW is there to remind you of action verbs. The MoSCoW technique was developed by Dai Clegg , who also played an essential role in the development of the first agile methodologies in the form of the Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) , one of the early agile frameworks .

This prioritization method can be used for just about anything, but is most often employed for agile projects and software development to sort user stories and technical requirements. Its principles are simple: not all features of the project are essential to its success. There are features that the project:

• Must have (Mo)
• Should have (Sc)
• Could have (Co)
• Won’t have, at least for now (W)

There are many advantages that make this technique a valuable prioritization technique. The MoSCoW framework:

• Makes the vision more apparent, as words are used instead of numbers or generic terms such as “High” or “Low” to define the priority. This allows the team to focus on what to deliver, rather than argue about meaningless priority levels .
• It doesn’t allow for indecision by including a “Medium” option, yet is flexible enough to give some leeway for debate regarding a feature if the team doesn’t agree from the get-go.
• It’s intuitive and easy to understand, even for non-specialists. This could be especially useful when communicating with stakeholders .

In short, this method keeps it simple, verbal and understandable . Are you sold yet? If so, learn how to make the most of this tool right about… well, now!

How to use the MoSCoW method

As we’ve seen, this tool is designed to decide what are important requirements and prioritise them using 4 labels.

This category is reserved for items that are essential to the success of the project. They cannot be replaced and define the project globally. Must-haves should include:

• All functionalities are required for compliance reasons. Compliance requirements could be related to security and privacy, or be legal obligations.
• All functionalities could not be overlooked or replaced without making the product unusable. These key requirements are required for the product or software to accomplish the basic tasks it was designed for.

To sum up, this category regroups anything that could make the product or software impossible to release or sell .

Some basic examples could include characteristics such as:

• The homepage in the case of a website,
• The wheels to build a bike,
• Security standards to create a professional application...

These features are slightly different from the first category. The final product does not need “should have” functionalities to be functional and usable. However, these should be implemented throughout the course of product development because they add significant business value .

For example, these initiatives could be:

• Implementing a search function on a website,
• Make the bike capable of being used on many terrains ...

The “could have” features are functionalities that would be nice to have , meaning that it would add some business benefits to the project, but less so than “should have” features. They aren’t prioritized: they are kept in the backlog if enough time is available to implement them. However, if the features from the first two categories take longer to develop than expected, they would be postponed or cancelled first .

In some cases, it could be useful to conduct a business analysis to determine the degree of importance and priority of an item, as “should” and “could” are similar in some aspects.

… For now. This group is the most important to define the limits of the scope of your project . It regroups the features that are unlikely to ever be implemented, either because they provide little value to your business, or because they would take too much effort . Or both.

But nothing is set in stone , so a handful of these features could be prioritized later on if deemed useful. Some argue that good practice is to subdivide this category into two subsections, one being “ will not have ”, and the other “will not have this time ”. This allows the team, Project Manager or Product Owner to see which items could be added to the sprint backlog if there is time left for a few sprints before the deadline.

To get your priorities straight shortly, why not use our MoSCoW prioritization PDF template ? If urgent matters are at hand, lose no time and get started right away with this ready to use model you can complete with your own requirements!

Though the MoSCoW technique is a widely used and fairly popular prioritization tool , it isn’t exempt from criticism.

• The verbal basis of this technique makes it more subjective than pure statistics. While it’s useful to reach a consensus and for communication purposes, some may find the “should have” and “could have” categories too similar.
• Make it clear from the start whether it will include features that won’t be part of a specific release or items that should be scrapped completely .
• Subdivide the category to keep these two types of features separate.
• If you go with the “won’t have for now” option, make sure that the scope of your project stays in check , as adding too many low-value items would defeat the purpose.
• It provides no native way to distinguish prioritization levels for items within the same category.

Each prioritization method has its own pros and cons, but some could be best suited to your needs. Below are some of the most popular alternatives to the MoSCoW model:

• User Story Mapping
• The Kano Model
• The RICE Scoring Model
• The PriX Method
• Cost of Delay

Additionally, other useful matrices exist in agile project management to set priorities, either for urgent tasks with the Eisenhower Matrix or in stakeholder mapping with the Power/Interest Matrix .

The MoSCoW prioritization technique is a useful method to help you define the scope of your project. It is an intuitive matrix designed to spark a debate around which features are vital , and which would add the most value to your project .

Setting the right amount of work to put in a project means getting your priorities straight first . Don’t overlook the prioritization process to plan your sprints and manage stakeholder expectations with confidence. Are you ready to tackle the steps of your project in the right order ?

Discover our complete Project Management catalog

Best tools for you.

Software vendors

Work smarter by appvizer.

New trends and tips to be more efficient at work, in your mailbox.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

MoSCoW Method PowerPoint Templates

Our vast library of Moscow Method PowerPoint templates are professionally designed to elevate your presentation style in any professional meeting. The collection provides a comprehensive framework to professionals across industries to streamline their efforts, ideas and overall message. The fully editable Moscow Method PowerPoint and Google Slides templates breathe life into complex facts, figures and information and present them in an engaging manner to ensure a long lasting impact on your audience’s minds.

Our extensive collection of Moscow Method PPT templates promote productivity and convenience when it comes to its applications. These templates have been thoughtfully designed to ensure maximum visual impact. Explore our collection of Moscow Method presentation templates and download the perfect template to take your presentation to new heights!

• Price <= $5.99
• Price > $5.99

MoSCow Method 02 PowerPoint Template

Login to use this feature

Add-to-favs lets you build a list for inspiration and future use.

Log in now to start adding your favs.

If you don't have one. A free account also gives you access to our free templates library

MoSCow Method 06 PowerPoint Template

MoSCow Method 01 PowerPoint Template

MoSCow Method 05 PowerPoint Template

MoSCow Method 04 PowerPoint Template

MoSCow Method 03 PowerPoint Template

Moscow method powerpoint templates for presentations:.

The Moscow Method PowerPoint templates go beyond traditional static slides to make your professional presentations stand out. Given the sleek design and customized features, they can be used as PowerPoint as well as Google Slides templates . Inculcated with visually appealing unique and creative designs, the templates will double your presentation value in front of your audience. You can browse through a vast library of Moscow Method Google Slides templates, PowerPoint themes and backgrounds to stand out in your next presentation.

What Is A Moscow Method PowerPoint Template?

A Moscow Method PowerPoint template is a ready-made presentation template that provides a structured framework for creating professional Moscow Method presentations. The Moscow Method PPT presentation template includes design elements, layouts, and fonts that you can customize to fit your content and brand.

What Are the Advantages of Moscow Method Presentation Templates?

Moscow Method PPT presentation templates can be beneficial because they:

• Add multiple visual and aesthetic layers to your slides.
• Ensure that complex information, insights and data is presented in a simplistic way.
• Enhance the overall visual appeal of the content.
• Save you a lot of time as you don’t have to start editing from scratch.
• Improve the professional outlook of your presentation.

How To Choose The Best Moscow Method Presentation Templates?

Keep the following points in mind while choosing a Moscow Method Presentation template for PowerPoint (PPT) or Google Slides:

• Understand your presentation goals and objectives.
• Make sure the Moscow Method template aligns with your visual needs and appeal.
• Ensure the template is versatile enough to adapt to various types of content.
• Ensure the template is easily customizable.

Can I Edit The Elements In Moscow Method PowerPoint Templates?

Yes, our Moscow Method PowerPoint and Google Slides templates are fully editable. You can easily modify the individual elements including icons, fonts, colors, etc. while making your presentations using professional PowerPoint templates .

Are Moscow Method PowerPoint Templates Compatible with Google Slides?

Yes, all our Moscow Method presentation templates are compatible and can be used as Moscow Method Google Slides templates.

How to Download Moscow Method PowerPoint Templates for presentations?

To download Moscow Method presentation templates, you can follow these steps:

• Select the resolution (16*9 or 4*3).
• Select the format you want to download the Moscow Method template in (Google Slides or PowerPoint).
• Make the payment (SlideUpLift has a collection of paid as well as free Moscow Method PowerPoint templates).
• You can download the file or open it in Google Slides.

Related Presentation Templates

Prioritization.

58 templates

Project Management

1,522 templates

171 templates

5,634 templates

SWOT Analysis

130 templates

Forgot Password?

Privacy Overview

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information

Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.

• Get started
• Project management
• CRM and Sales
• Work management
• Product development life cycle
• Comparisons
• Construction management
• monday.com updates

The MoSCoW prioritization method explained

When developing a new product or embarking on a new project, it can be difficult to decide which elements to include and which are more expendable. Prioritizing tasks is usually a team effort, requiring input from everyone involved in the project setup. Getting a clear idea of which elements should take the lead from the start can help you to avoid hiccups later on. For this reason, using the MoSCoW prioritization method to categorize project elements based on importance can be helpful for getting started.

The MoSCoW prioritization method is a tool that can be used to prioritize projects, initiatives, or tasks. It is especially useful when there are many competing demands and it is not possible to do everything at once. Using monday.com’s Work OS, you can quickly and easily break down projects into simple tasks and their priorities. Now, let’s discuss everything you need to know about using this method.

Try monday dev

What is the MoSCoW prioritization method?

]MoSCoW prioritization is a tool for creating a hierarchy of priorities before and during a project. It stems from the Agile project management method, which aims to establish elements like product cost, quality, and requirements as early as possible.

MoSCoW is an acronym for “must-have,” “should-have,” “could-have,” and “won’t-have (this time).” Each item in the acronym denotes a category of prioritization. The idea is that items are categorized at the beginning of a project to clarify what is strictly necessary, what is desirable, and what the project can do without. Before we get deeper into the categories, let’s take a look at where this method came from.

“MoSCoW prioritization method” is a part of our Project Management Glossary  — check out the full list of terms and definitions!

Where does the term MoSCoW come from?

The term MoSCoW comes originated with software developer Dai Clegg, who created the method when he was working at Oracle. To help his team prioritize tasks during development work on product releases, he devised the MoSCoW technique. The acronym includes lowercase Os between consonants to make it easier to pronounce.

You can now find a detailed account of how to use the MoSCoW method in the Dynamic System Development Method (DSDM) handbook. The MoSCoW method can be used to prioritize requirements, product features, or any other project elements. When using the MoSCoW method, each element is assigned to one of the four prioritization categories based on its importance to the project. Now, let’s take a closer look at the prioritization categories and how to use them.

What are the categories within the MoSCoW prioritization method?

As mentioned previously, the acronym “MoSCoW” stands for “must-have,” “should-have,” “could-have,” and “won’t-have (this time).”

• Must-have:  These items are essential for the success of the project. There can be no compromise on whether they are included, because without them, the entire project would be meaningless. In short, this is a top-priority MoSCoW requirement.
• Should-have:  These items are those that are important but not absolutely essential like those in the “must-have” category. Elements in this category are considered a secondary priority; that is, they are important, but not crucial to success.
• Could-have:  These  items would be nice to have but are not essential. Still less important than the two preceding categories, these elements are considered a third-level priority. If including them will have negative consequences on cost or meeting deadlines, they should be omitted. It is only when they don’t negatively affect other project elements that they should be included.
• Won’t-have (this time):  These  items are those that are not essential and can be excluded from the project without jeopardizing its success. Being the lowest priority category, omitting them won’t hurt the project and they can be included when project conditions are more favorable.

When should you use the MoSCoW prioritization method?

The advantage of the MoSCoW method is that it can be applied to a wide range of situations, both in personal and professional contexts. For instance, an individual might use the method to prioritize their workload for the week or a team might use it to identify which tasks need to be completed first to meet a looming deadline. In general, the MoSCoW method is most useful when an individual or team is facing a large number of tasks and needs help deciding which ones to focus on first. Additionally, if you’re starting a project and are unsure which elements should take priority, you can get your team together and use the MoSCoW method as a discussion tool.

However, it should be noted that the method does have some limitations. For instance, it doesn’t account for task dependencies or other factors that might impact the order in which tasks should be completed. As such, it should be used as one tool in a broader arsenal of task-management strategies.

MoSCoW method: the pros and cons

Because the framework makes it possible to manage the requirements for a given product release, it’s extremely common among Agile projects with set timeboxes. Within project management, this prioritization technique has demonstrated its effectiveness and dependability. Of course, it isn’t flawless — an objective look can help highlight shortcomings as well as benefits of the MoSCoW method. Let’s examine its pros and cons.

• Easy to master:  The method is based on very simple principles that are easy to understand, so you won’t need to do much background research before getting started.
• Helps prioritize:  It helps to clearly visualize priorities and sort them into a hierarchy. This way, you’ll never need to be confused about which elements are more or less important than others.
• Useful for team discussions:  Using the MoSCoW method in group discussions can be a great way to get team members to open up about their ideas. It can serve as a conversation starter, putting everyone on the same page.
• Helps achieve stakeholder consensus:  When used among stakeholders, it can be a good way to reach an agreement between stakeholders on which elements should take priority. When stakeholders are present during the categorization process, this improves their understanding of the project.
• Can prevent scope creep:  Scope creep is when unintentional changes occur during project execution. By setting clear and fixed priorities at the beginning, scope creep can be prevented.
• Priority requirements can be subjective:  Since the categorization procedure is not based on numerical data, it leaves room for subjective interpretation. This can manifest as conflicting ideas about which elements should take the lead and which are less important.
• Items require background context:  To accurately categorize each element, you’ll need to provide context for each of them. This may be time-consuming and tedious.
• Doesn’t account for possible change:  Putting items into a fixed category doesn’t allow you to account for possible changes that occur during project execution. For example, elements that are not necessary at the start may become crucial down the line based on extraneous changes in circumstance.

Examples of the MoSCoW prioritization method in practice 

Imagine that a software development  product manager is developing a new cloud-based workspace for individuals and organizations to improve their workflow. They’re trying to decide which features are most important, which would be nice, and which probably won’t make it into this specific release. They decide that cloud storage is a must-have feature, otherwise, it wouldn’t be cloud-based, and they would be completely missing their target. Once the must-haves are identified, they are further broken down into smaller tasks, or “should-haves”. These should-haves are then prioritized according to their importance. Finally, the remaining tasks are classified as either “could-haves” or “won’t-haves.”

Another example involves a marketing team who are trying to prioritize tasks for their next marketing strategy . Seeing as the vast majority of their sales come from email marketing, they list this as a top priority. Their second biggest number of sales comes from Instagram marketing, so they categorize this as a secondary priority, and so on.

Executing task prioritization on monday.com

monday.com is a great tool for managing tasks and priorities. With its sleek interface and simple task management system, it’s easy to see why so many people use it. However, one of its most important features is the ability to prioritize tasks using matrices and task prioritization templates . This is especially useful for professionals who need to make sure they’re focusing on what’s important. monday.com makes it easy to share tasks and priorities with others, so you can be sure that team members and stakeholders are on the same page. With its convenient features and simple task management system, monday.com is the perfect tool for anyone who needs to prioritize their tasks.

Frequently asked questions

What does moscow mean.

The MoSCoW prioritization method is a widely-used framework for setting priorities and managing trade-offs during product development. The acronym MoSCoW stands for “must-have,” “should-have,” “could-have,” and “won’t-have (this time).” The method is a helpful tool for organizations that need to prioritize product features. It can be used in different situations and can help to resolve conflicts between stakeholders.

How is a MoSCoW analysis conducted?

The method involves four steps. First, all the potential features are listed. Second, the features are evaluated according to three criteria: how much users will want the feature, how difficult it will be to implement, and how much the feature will improve the product. Third, the features are plotted on a graph according to these criteria. Finally, the features are prioritized based on where they fall on the graph.

Getting priorities straight

The MoSCoW prioritization method can be adapted to different situations and organizations, making it a versatile tool for decision-making. The advantages of using this method are that it’s simple to use, it can help spark discussions between team members, and it gets stakeholders on the same page. monday.com offers a range of prioritization matrices to help you hierarchically structure task importance and get work done in the most optimal way. Our feature-rich Work OS offers everything you and your team need to streamline your digital workflow and meet your business objectives.

• Agile methodology

Don’t miss more quality content!

Send this article to someone who’d like it.

Moscow Method

What do you think of this template.

Product details

At its core, the MoSCoW method is simply a prioritization framework that can be applied to any kind of situation or project, but it works best when a large number of tasks need to be ruthlessly whittled down into a prioritized and achievable to-do list. The core aim of the process is to classify tasks into four buckets; Must, Should, Could and Won’t. As you can probably fathom, Must is the highest priority bucket, and Won’t is the lowest. You can also presumably now see where the funny capitalization in the term ‘MoSCoW’ derives from. One of the primary benefits of a MoSCoW exercise is that it forces hard decisions to be made regarding which direction a digital product project will take. Indeed, the process is usually the first time a client has been asked to really weigh up which functions are absolutely fundamental to the product (Must), which are merely important (Should) and which are just nice-to-haves (Could). This can make the MoSCoW method challenging, but also incredibly rewarding. It’s not uncommon for there to be hundreds of user stories at this stage of a project, as they cover every aspect of what a user or admin will want to do with the digital product. With so many stories to keep track of it helps to group them into sets. For example, you may want to group all the stories surrounding checkout, or onboarding into one group. When we run a MoSCoW process, we use the following definitions. Must – These stories are vital to the function of the digital product. If any of these stories were removed or not completed, the product would not function. Should – These stories make the product better in important ways, but are not vital to the function of the product. We would like to add these stories to the MVP build, but we’ll only start working on them once all the Must stories are complete. Could – These stories would be nice to have, but do not add lots of extra value for users. These stories are often related to styling or ‘finessing’ a product. Won’t – These stories or functions won’t be considered at this stage as they are either out of scope or do not add value.

The first two slides of the template are similar in design and structure. These slides can be used to provide general information to the team about the client’s needs. The slides will be useful for the product owner, development team, and scrum master. The next slide groups user stories into vertical columns. You can also set a progress status for each user story. The last slide gives you the ability to specify the time spent on each user story. After summing up the time for each group, the team can understand how long it will take them to complete each group. All slides in this template are editable based on your needs. The template will be useful to everyone who uses the Agile method in their work.

Related Products

Value Stream Mapping Template

Strategic Account Planning

30-60-90 Day Project Plan

RAID Log Template

Release Plan

Pareto Principle

Scoreboard Template

Recruitment Plan

Configuration Management Plan

Delivery Plan

You dont have access, please change your membership plan., great you're all signed up..., verify your account.

PowerSlides.com will email you template files that you've chosen to dowload.

Please make sure you've provided a valid email address! Sometimes, our emails can end up in your Promotions/Spam folder.

Simply, verify your account by clicking on the link in your email.

Powerpoint Templates

Icon Bundle

Kpi Dashboard

Professional

Business Plans

Swot Analysis

Gantt Chart

Business Proposal

Marketing Plan

Project Management

Business Case

Business Model

Cyber Security

Business PPT

Digital Marketing

Digital Transformation

Human Resources

Product Management

Artificial Intelligence

Company Profile

Acknowledgement PPT

PPT Presentation

Reports Brochures

One Page Pitch

Interview PPT

All Categories

Moscow prioritization technique minimum usable ppt powerpoint presentation guide

This slide consists of the MoSCoW technique which focuses on must, should, could, and would method to categorize projects based on the list of requirements, ideas, etc.

These PPT Slides are compatible with Google Slides

Compatible With Google Slides

• Google Slides is a new FREE Presentation software from Google.
• All our content is 100% compatible with Google Slides.
• Just download our designs, and upload them to Google Slides and they will work automatically.
• Amaze your audience with SlideTeam and Google Slides.

Want Changes to This PPT Slide? Check out our Presentation Design Services

Get Presentation Slides in WideScreen

Get This In WideScreen

• WideScreen Aspect ratio is becoming a very popular format. When you download this product, the downloaded ZIP will contain this product in both standard and widescreen format.

• Some older products that we have may only be in standard format, but they can easily be converted to widescreen.
• To do this, please open the SlideTeam product in Powerpoint, and go to
• Design ( On the top bar) -> Page Setup -> and select "On-screen Show (16:9)” in the drop down for "Slides Sized for".
• The slide or theme will change to widescreen, and all graphics will adjust automatically. You can similarly convert our content to any other desired screen aspect ratio.
• Add a user to your subscription for free

You must be logged in to download this presentation.

Do you want to remove this product from your favourites?

PowerPoint presentation slides

This slide consists of the MoSCoW technique which focuses on must, should, could, and would method to categorize projects based on the list of requirements, ideas, etc. Presenting this set of slides with name Moscow Prioritization Technique Minimum Usable Ppt Powerpoint Presentation Guide. This is a four stage process. The stages in this process are Important Requirements, Fundamental Requirements, Non Value Adding Requirements, Negotiable Requirements. This is a completely editable PowerPoint presentation and is available for immediate download. Download now and impress your audience.

People who downloaded this PowerPoint presentation also viewed the following :

• Diagrams , Business , Marketing , Management , Business Slides , Flat Designs , Tables and Matrix , Strategic Planning
• Important Requirements ,
• Fundamental Requirements ,
• Non Value Adding Requirements ,
• Negotiable Requirements

Moscow prioritization technique minimum usable ppt powerpoint presentation guide with all 2 slides:

Use our Moscow Prioritization Technique Minimum Usable Ppt Powerpoint Presentation Guide to effectively help you save your valuable time. They are readymade to fit into any presentation structure.

Ratings and Reviews

by O'Ryan Edwards

September 17, 2020

by Danny Kennedy

by Del Holmes

by Michael Clark

by Harry Williams

International Conference on Agile Software Development

XP 2022: Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming pp 19–34 Cite as

Moscow Rules: A Quantitative Exposé

• Eduardo Miranda   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8195-7506 10  
• Conference paper
• Open Access
• First Online: 09 June 2022

7033 Accesses

1 Citations

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 445))

This article analyzes the performance of the MoSCoW method to deliver all features in each of its categories: Must Have, Should Have and Could Have using Monte Carlo simulation. The analysis shows that under MoSCoW rules, a team ought to be able to deliver all Must Have features for underestimations of up to 100% with very high probability. The conclusions reached are important for developers as well as for project sponsors to know how much faith to put on any commitments made.

You have full access to this open access chapter,  Download conference paper PDF

1 Introduction

MoSCoW rules [ 1 ], also known as feature buffers [ 2 ], is a popular method to give predictability to projects with incremental deliveries. The method does this by establishing four categories of features: M ust Have, S hould Have, C ould Have and W on’t Have, from where the MoSCoW acronym is coined. Each of the first three categories is allocated a fraction of the development budget, typically 60, 20 and 20 percent, and features assigned to them according to the preferences Footnote 1 of the product owner until the allocated budgets are exhausted by subtracting from them, the development effort estimated for each feature assigned to the category. By not starting work in a lower preference category until all the work in the more preferred ones have been completed, the method effectively creates a buffer or management reserve of 40% for the Must Have features, and of 20% for those in the Should Have category. These buffers increase the confidence that all features in those categories will be delivered by the project completion date. As all the development budget is allocated by the method, there are no white spaces in the plan, which together with incentive contracts, makes the method palatable to sponsors and management.

Knowing how much confidence to place in the delivery of features in a given category is an important concern for developers and sponsors alike. For developers it helps in formulating plans consistent with the organization’s risk appetite, making promises they can keep, and in calculating the price of incentives in contracts as well as the risk of incurring penalties, should these exist. For sponsors, it informs them the likelihood the features promised will be delivered, so they, in turn, can make realistic plans based on it. To this purpose, the article will explore:

The probabilities of delivering all the features in each of the categories: Must Have, Should Have and Could Have, under varying levels of under and overestimation of the features’ development efforts

The impact of features’ sizes, dominance, number of features, and correlation between development efforts in said probabilities

The effect of budget allocations other than the customary 60/20/20 on them.

To calculate the probabilities of delivery (PoDs) we need to make suitable assumptions about the distribution of the efforts required to develop each feature since the single point estimate used in the MoSCoW method are insufficient to characterize them.

In this article, those assumptions are derived from two scenarios: a low confidence estimates scenario used to establish worst case Footnote 2 PoDs and a typical estimates scenario used to calculate less conservative PoDs.

The potential efforts required and the corresponding PoDs, are calculated using Monte Carlo simulations [ 3 , 4 ] to stochastically add the efforts consumed by each feature to be developed.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Sect.  2 provides an introduction to the MoSCoW method, Sect.  3 introduces the Monte Carlo simulation technique and describes the calculations used for the interested reader, Sect.  4 discusses the two scenarios used in the calculations, Sect.  5 analyzes the main factors affecting the method’s performance, Sect.  6 discuss the method’s effectiveness in each of the scenarios and Sect.  7 summarizes the results obtained.

2 The MoSCoW Method

The MoSCoW acronym was coined by D. Clegg and R. Baker [ 5 ], who in 1994 proposed the classification of requirements into Must Have, Should Have, Could Have and Won’t Have. The classification was made on the basis of the requirements’ own value and was unconstrained, i.e. all the requirements meeting the criteria for “Must Have” could be classified as such. In 2002, the SPID method [ 6 ] used a probabilistic backcasting approach to define the scope of three software increments roughly corresponding to the Must Have, Should Have and Could Have categories, but constraining the number of Must Have to those that could be completed within budget at a level of certainty chosen by the organization. In 2006, the DSDM Consortium, now the Agile Business Consortium, published the DSDM Public Version 4.2 [ 7 ] establishing the 60/20/20% recommendation although this, was probably used before by Consortium’s members on their own practices. The current formulation of the MoSCoW prioritization rules is documented in the DSDM Agile Project Framework [ 1 ].

During the project planning phase, see Fig.  1 .a, features are allocated to one of four sets: Must Have, Should Have, Could Have, and Won’t Have on the basis of customer preferences and dependencies until the respective budgets are exhausted.

MoSCoW rules at play: a) During planning, b) in execution

During execution, Fig.  1 .b, features in the Must Have category are developed first, those in the Should Have second, and those in the Could Have, in third place. If at any time the work in any category requires more effort than planned, work on them will continue at the expense of those in the lower preference categories which will be pushed out of scope in the same amount as the extra effort required. The advantage for the project sponsor is that, whatever happens, he or she can rest assured of getting a working product with an agreed subset of the total functionality by the end of the project.

For the MoSCoW method to be accepted by the developer as well as by the sponsor of a project, the risk of partial deliveries must be shared between both of them through incentive contracts since approaches like firm fixed price or time and materials, that offloads most of the risk on only one of the parties could be either, prohibitive or unacceptable to the other. Contractually, the concept of agreed partial deliveries might adopt different forms. For example, the contract could establish a base price for the Must Have set, with increasingly higher bonuses or rewards for the Should Have and Could Have releases. Conversely the contract could propose a price for all deliverables and include penalties or discounts if the lower priority releases are not delivered. This way the incentives and disincentives will prevent the developer from charging a premium price to protect itself from not delivering all features while the sponsor, is assured the developer will do its best, in order to win the rewards.

3 The Monte Carlo Simulation

The Monte Carlo method is a random sampling technique used to calculate probability distributions for aggregated random variables from elementary distributions. The technique is best applied to problems not amenable to closed form solutions derived by algebraic methods.

The Monte Carlo method involves the generation of random samples from known or assumed elementary probability distributions, the aggregation or combination of the sample values according to the logic of the model been simulated and the recording of the calculated values for the purpose of conducting an ex-post statistical analysis.

The technique is widely used [ 3 , 4 ] in probabilistic cost, schedule and risk assessments and numerous tools Footnote 3 exist to support the computations needed.

The results presented in the paper were calculated using @Risk 7.5. As these are the product of simulation runs, they might slightly differ from one run to another, or when using a different number of iterations or platforms.

The rest of the section explains the model used to generate the cumulative probability curves and calculate the PoD for each MoSCoW category: Must Have (MH), Should Have (SH) and Could Have (CH), with the purpose of allowing interested readers replicate the studies or develop their own simulations. Those not so inclined might skip it, with little or no loss in understanding the paper. The name of the parameters should make them self-explanatory however, conceptual definitions about its meaning and usage will be provided throughout the paper.

The probability of completing all features in a given category in, or under, an \(x\) amount of effort is defined as:

The cumulative distribution functions: \(F_{MH} \left( x \right), \,F_{SH} \left( x \right)\, {\text{and}}\, F_{CH} \left( x \right)\) , are built by repeatedly sampling and aggregating the effort required by the features included in each category.

similarly, for features j and k, and:

subject to the maximum allocation of effort for each category:

The Probability of Delivery (PoD) of each category is defined as:

All quantities are normalized for presentation purposes by dividing them by the \(DevelopmentBudget\) .

4 Low and Typical Confidence Scenarios

Figure  2 contrasts the two scenarios mentioned in the introduction. The low confidence scenario is characterized by the uniform distribution of the potential efforts required to realize each feature, with the lower limit of each distribution corresponding to the team’s estimated effort for the feature and their upper to increments of 50, 100 and 200% above them, to express increasing levels of uncertainty. Since all values in the interval have equal probability, this scenario corresponds to a maximum uncertainty state [ 8 ]. This situation, however unrealistic it might seem, is useful to calculate a worst case for the PoD of each category. In the typical confidence scenario, the potential efforts are characterized by a right skewed triangular distributions, in which the team’s estimates correspond to the most likely value of the distribution, meaning the realization of many features will take about what was estimated, some will take some more and a few could take less.

Probability distributions for the effort required by each feature in the low (uniform distributions) and typical (triangular distributions) confidence scenarios

The right skewness of the typical estimate distributions is predicated on our tendency to estimate based on imagining success [ 9 ], behaviors like Parkinson’s Law Footnote 4 and the Student Syndrome Footnote 5 , which limit the potential for completing development with less effort usage than estimated, and the fact that the number of things that can go wrong is practically unlimited [ 10 , 11 ]. Although many distributions fit this pattern, e.g. PERT, lognormal, etc., the triangular one was chosen for its simplicity and because its mass is not concentrated around the most likely point [ 12 ], thus yielding a more conservative estimate than the other distributions mentioned.

As before, the right extreme of the distribution takes values corresponding to 50, 100 and 200 percent underestimation levels. For the lower limit however, the 80 percent of the most likely value was chosen for the reasons explained above.

Considering this second scenario is important, because although having a worst case for the PoDs is valuable as they tell the lowest the probabilities could be, relying on them for decision making may lead to lost opportunities because of overcautious behaviors.

5 Level of Underestimation, Correlation, Number of Features in a Category, Feature Dominance and Non-traditional Budget Allocations

Before calculating the PoDs for each MoSCoW category under the two scenarios, the impact of different factors on the PoD is explored with the purpose of developing an appreciation for how they affect the results shown, i.e. what makes the PoDs go up or down. Understanding this is important for those wanting to translate the conclusions drawn here to other contexts.

Although the analysis will be conducted only for the low confidence estimates for reasons of space, the same conclusions applies to the typical estimates scenario, with the curves slightly shifted to the left.

Figure  3 shows the impact of underestimation levels of up to 50, 100 and 200% of the features’ individual estimates on the PoD of a Must Have category comprising 15 equal sized features, whose development efforts are independent from each other.

Independent, as used here, means the efforts required by any two features will not deviate from its estimates conjointly due to a common factor such as the maturity of the technology, the capability of the individual developing it or the consistent over optimism of an estimator. When this occurs, the efforts are correlated rather than independent. Having a common factor does not automatically mean the actual efforts are correlated. For example, a feature could take longer because it includes setting up a new technology, but once this is done, it doesn’t mean other features using the same technology would take longer since the it is already deployed. On the other hand, the use of an immature open source library could affect the testing and debugging of all the features in which it is included.

The higher the number of correlated features and the stronger the correlation between them, the more individual features’ efforts would tend to vary in the same direction, either requiring less or more of it, which would translate into higher variability at the total development effort level. This is shown by curves “r = 0.2”, “r = 0.6” and “r = 0.8” in Fig.  4 , becoming flatter as the correlation (r) increases.

Correlation brings good and bad news. If things go well, the good auspices will apply to many features, increasing the probability of completing all of them on budget. Conversely, if things do not go as well as envisioned, all affected features will require more effort, and the buffers would not provide enough slack to complete all of them.

Estimating the level of correlation between estimates is not an easy task, it requires assessing the influence one or more common factors could have on the items affected by them, a task harder than producing the effort estimates themselves. So while correlation cannot be ignored at risk of under or over estimating the safety provided by the method, the cost of estimating it, would be prohibitive for most projects. Based on simulation studies, Garvey et al. [ 13 ] recommend using a coefficient of correlation of 0.2 across all the estimated elements to solve the dilemma, while Kujawski et al. [ 14 ], propose to use a coefficient of 0.6 for elements belonging to the same subsystem, as these would tend to exhibit high commonality since in general, the technology used and the people building it would be the same, and 0.3 for elements on different subsystems, because of the lower commonality.

Cumulative completion probabilities under increasing levels of underestimation. The simulation shows a PoD for the Must Have features of 100% for an underestimation level of up to 50%, of 98.9% at up to 100%, and of 1.3% for an underestimation in which each feature can require up to 200% of the estimated budget.

The PoDs are also affected by the number of features in the category as well as by the existence of dominant features, which are features whose realization requires a significative part of the budget allocated to the category. See Figs.  5 and 6 .

As in the case of correlation, a small number of features and the presence of dominant features result in an increase in the variability of the estimates. Dominant features, contribute to this increase because it is very unlikely that deviations on their effort requirements could be counterbalanced by the independent deviations of the remaining features in the category. As for the increase of variability with a diminishing number of features, the reason is that with a fewer independent features, the probability of them going all in one direction, is higher than with many features.

The model in Fig.  7 challenges the premise of allocating 60% of the development budget to the Must Have category and explores alternative assignments of 50, 70 and 80% of the total budget. Reducing the budget allocation from 60 to 50% increases the protection the method affords at the expense of reducing the number of features a team can commit to. Increasing the budget allocation for the Must Have allows developers to promise more, but as will be shown, this is done at the expense of reducing the certainty of delivering it. For the 50% allocation level, there is a 100% chance of delivering the Must Have for underestimations of up to 100%, and of 68.2% for underestimations of up to 200%. At the 70% allocation level, the simulation shows that the PoD for the Must Have, when the possibility of underestimation is up to 50% still is 100%, but that it drops sharply to 34% when the underestimation level rises to up to 100%. For the 80% allocation level, the PoD for the Must Have falls to 49.7% for the up to 50% underestimation level and to 0 for the other two. The rest of the paper will then use the customary 60, 20 & 20% allocation scheme.

Probability of completing all features in the Must Have category under a given percent of the budget when the underestimation level is up to 100% and the efforts are correlated (r > 0)

Influence of the number of features on the PoD for a Must Have set containing the number of equally sized independent features indicated by the legend on the chart, with an underestimation level of up to 100%. The PoD offered by the method drops sharply when the set contains less than 5 features

Influence of a dominant feature on the PoD. Each set, with the exception of the dominant at 100%, contained 15 features, with the dominant feature assigned the bulk of the effort as per the legend in the chart with the remaining budget equally distributed among the other 14 features. The safety offered by the method drops sharply when a feature takes more than 25% of the budgeted effort for the category. Underestimation of up to 100% and independent efforts

Probability of delivering all Must Have features for Must Have budget allocations of 50, 60, 70 and 80% under different underestimation conditions. The respective number of Must Have features for each budget allocation were 12, 15, 17, and 20.

6 Probabilities of Delivery for Each MoSCoW Category

This section discusses the PoDs for each MoSCoW category: Must Have, Should Have and Could Have under the following conditions:

Low confidence estimation, independent efforts

Low confidence estimation, correlated efforts

Typical estimation, independent efforts

Typical estimation, correlated efforts

In all cases, the underestimations considered are of up to 50, 100 and 200% of the estimated effort, a 60/20/20 effort allocation scheme and a Must Have category comprising 15 equal sized features with Should and Could Have categories comprising 5 equal sized features each. These assumptions are consistent with the precedent analysis and with the small criteria in the INVEST [ 15 ] list of desirable properties for user stories. For the correlated efforts cases, the article follows Kujaswki’s recommendation, of using an r = 0.6, as many of the attributes of an agile development project: dedicated small teams, exploratory work and refactoring, tend to affect all features equally.

6.1 Low Confidence, Independent Efforts

Figure  8 shows the PoDs for all MoSCoW categories for the low confidence, uncorrelated features, r = 0, model. At up to 50% underestimation, the probability of delivering all Must Have is 100%, as expected, and the probability of delivering all Should Have is 50.2%. At up to 100% underestimation, the probability of delivering all the Must Have still high, 98.9% but the probability of completing all the Should Have drops to 0. At up to 200% the probability of delivering all the Must Haves is pretty low, at 1.3%. In no case it was possible to complete the Could Have within budget.

6.2 Low Confidence, Correlated Efforts

As shown by Fig.  9 , in this case the variability of the aggregated efforts increases, with the outermost points of the distribution becoming more extreme as all the efforts tend to move in unison in one or another direction. Comparing the PoDs for this case with those of the previous one, it seems paradoxical, that while the PoD for the Must Have at 100% underestimation level goes down from 98.9 to 74.0, the PoD for the same category at 200% underestimation level goes up from 1.3 to 26.9%! This is what was meant when it was said that correlation brought good and bad news.

Probability of delivering all features in a category in the case of low confidence estimates under different levels of underestimation when the efforts required by each feature are independent (r = 0)

To understand what is happening, it suffices to look at Fig.  10 . Figure  10 .a shows histograms of the Must Have aggregated independent efforts for uncertainty levels of 50, 100 and 200%. Because of the relatively lower upper limit and the tightness of the distribution spread afforded by the sum of independent efforts, the 100% uncertainty distribution fits almost entirely to the left of the total budget, scoring this way a high PoD. A similar argument could be made for the 200% uncertainty level, except that this time, the distribution is almost entirely to the right of the total budget, thus yielding a very low PoD. As could be seen in Fig.  10 .b, when the efforts are correlated, the distributions spread more widely, making part of the 100% distribution fall to the right of the total budget line, reducing its PoD, and conversely, part of the 200% distribution might fall to the left of the line, thus increasing its PoD, which is what happened with this particular choice of parameter values.

Probability of delivering all features in a category in the case of low confidence estimates under different levels of underestimation when the efforts required by each feature are highly correlated (r = 0.6)

Histograms for Must Have features’ effort (a) left – independent efforts, (b) right – correlated efforts

6.3 Typical Estimates

Figures  11 and 12 show the typical estimates’ PoDs for uncorrelated and correlated efforts respectively. As expected, all the PoDs in this scenario are higher than in the case of the low confidence estimates. In the case of independent efforts, at up to 50% underestimation, the PoDs for the Must Have and the Should Have are 100%. At up to 100% underestimation, the PoD for the Must Have is 100% with the PoD for Should Have dropping to 39.7%. At up to 200% the probability of delivering all the Must Haves still high, at 70.5%, but there is no chance of delivering the Should Have. In no case, any Could Have were completed. For the correlated efforts case, the respective probabilities at 50% underestimation are: 100% for the Must Have, 88.7% for the Should Have and 20.6% for the Could Have. At 100% underestimation: 96.4, 50.3 and 8.6% respectively and at 200% underestimation: 59.8, 20.5 and 3%.

Probability of delivering all features in a category in the case of typical estimates under different levels of underestimation when the efforts required by each feature are independent (r = 0)

Probability of delivering all features in a category in the case of typical estimates under different levels of underestimation when the efforts required by each feature are highly correlated (r = 0.6).

This article sought to quantitatively answer the following questions:

What are the probabilities of delivering all the features in each of the categories: Must Have, Should Have and Could Have, under varying levels of under and overestimation of the features’ development efforts?

What is the influence of features’ sizes, feature dominance, number of features, and correlation between development efforts in said probabilities?

What is the effect of budget allocations other than the customary 60/20/20 on them?

To answer question 1, it is necessary to look at Table 1 which summarizes the results for the low confidence and typical estimates scenarios, for the three levels of underestimation studied: 50, 100 and 200%.

Not surprisingly, the results indicate that the method consistently yields a high PoD for the Must Have features. What is noteworthy, is its resilience in face of up to 100% underestimation of individual features in the category. For the Should Have, the results are robust for up to 50% of underestimation and with regards to the Could Have, they should only be expected if destiny is smiling upon the project.

Question 2 is important for practitioners preparing release plans. For the method to offer these levels of certainty, the number of features included in each category should be at least 5 with none of them requiring more than 25% of the effort allocated to the category. If these conditions are not met, the safety offered by the method drops sharply. Correlation, as mentioned before, is a mixed blessing. Depending on which direction things go, it can bring the only possibility of completing all the features in the project. Notice that in Table 1 , all the Could Have can only be completed when the efforts are highly correlated since all of them must be low. Under the independence assumption, when some could be low and others high, there is no chance of completing them on or under budget.

With regards to question 3, the 60, 20, 20% allocation seems to be the “Goldilocks” solution, balancing predictability with level of ambition. As shown by Fig.  7 , changing the allocation from 60 to 70%, has a dramatic impact on the safety margin which, at the up to 100% underestimation level, drops from 98.5 to 34%.

Finally, it is worth making clear, that the analysis refers to variations in execution times of planned work and not changes in project scope, which should be addressed differently.

The author gratefully acknowledges the helpful comments of Hakan Erdogmus. Diego Fontdevila and Alejandro Bianchi on earlier versions of this paper.

These preferences might induce dependencies that need to be addressed by the team, either by incorporating lower preference features in the higher categories or by doing additional work to mock the missing capabilities.

Worst case, means that if some of the assumptions associated with the scenario were to change, the probability of delivering within budget would increase.

@Risk by Palisade, Crystal Ball by Oracle, ModelRisk by Vose and Argo by Booz Allen among others.

Parkinson’s Law, the 1955 assertion by British economist Cyril Northcote Parkinson, that “Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion”, regardless of what was strictly necessary.

Student Syndrome, a term introduced by Eliyahu M. Goldratt in his 1997 novel Critical Chain to describe the planned procrastination of tasks by analogy with a student leaving working in an assignment until the last day before its due date.

Agile Business Consortium: Chapter 10 MoSCoW Prioritization, January 2014. https://www.agilebusiness.org/page/ProjectFramework_10_MoSCoWPrioritisation . Accessed 10 Oct 2021

Cohn, M.: Agile Estimationg and Planning. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2006)

Google Scholar  

Garvey, P.: Elements of Cost Risk Analysis. MITRE Corporation (2014)

Magennis, T.: Managing software development risk using modeling and Monte Carlo simulation. In: Lean Software and Systems Consortium Conference, Boston (2012)

Clegg, D., Baker, R.: CASE Method Fast-track: A RAD Approach. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1994)

Miranda, E.: Planning and Executing Time Bound Projects. IEEE Comput. (2002)

DSDM Consortium: Not longer accessible. http://www.dsdm.org/version4/2/public/default.asp

Shu-Cherng, F., Tsao, H.: Entropy optimization: shannon measure of entropy and its properties. In: Encyclopedia of Optimization, Springer, Boston (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48332-7_119

Newby Clark, I., Buehler, R., Koehler, D., Griffin, D.: People focus on optimistic scenarios and disregard pessimistic scenarios while predicting task completion times. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. (2000)

Halkjelsvik, T., Jørgensen, M.: Time Predictions: Understanding and Avoiding Unrealism in Project Planning and Everyday Life, Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74953-2

Kitchenham, B., Linkman, S.: Estimates, uncertainty and risk. IEEE Softw. (1997)

Hulett, D.: Practical Schedule Risk Analysis, Gower (2009)

Garvey, P., Book, S.C.R.: Probability Methods for Cost Uncertainty Analysis, 2nd. CRC Press (2016)

Kujawski, E., Edwards, W.R., Alvaro, M.L.: Incorporating psychological influences in probabilistic cost analysis. Syst. Eng. 7 (3) (2004)

Wake, B.: INVEST in Good Stories, and SMART Tasks. XP123, 17 8 (2003). https://xp123.com/articles/invest-in-good-stories-and-smart-tasks/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2021

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA

Eduardo Miranda

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eduardo Miranda .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Viktoria Stray

University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

Klaas-Jan Stol

LUT University, Lahti, Finland

Maria Paasivaara

University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Philippe Kruchten

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this paper

Cite this paper.

Miranda, E. (2022). Moscow Rules: A Quantitative Exposé. In: Stray, V., Stol, KJ., Paasivaara, M., Kruchten, P. (eds) Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming. XP 2022. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 445. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08169-9_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08169-9_2

Published : 09 June 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-08168-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-08169-9

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this paper

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Jul 12, 2014

941 likes | 3.12k Views

Moscow. Moscow. Moscow, the capital of Russia, is one of ancient Russian cities. It was founded by Prince Yuri Dolgoruki in 1147 . The city stands on the Moskva River. Moscow is the country's political, economic, religious, financial, educational and transportation centre. .

Share Presentation

• prezented ru
• supreme court
• kremlin wall
• dmitri donskoito peter
• tourist destinations

How America Is Picking Up the Pieces of a Broken Global Order

In “New Cold Wars,” David E. Sanger tracks the shifts in U.S. foreign policy as competition among the great powers re-emerges in the 21st century.

• Share full article

By Justin Vogt

Justin Vogt is an executive editor of Foreign Affairs.

• Barnes and Noble
• Books-A-Million

When you purchase an independently reviewed book through our site, we earn an affiliate commission.

NEW COLD WARS: China’s Rise, Russia’s Invasion, and America’s Struggle to Defend the West , by David E. Sanger with Mary K. Brooks

In recent years, the human toll of disease and war has been heartbreaking. But geopolitical upheaval and the return of great-power competition have also brought a fascinating revival of first-order questions: How does deterrence work? Does economic interdependence make countries less likely to fight? Does rising prosperity force authoritarian regimes to reform?

David E. Sanger’s “New Cold Wars ,” written with his longtime researcher Mary K. Brooks, tells the story of how those abstract debates have led to real-world consequences. Sanger, a veteran reporter for The New York Times who is at home in the arcane world of strategic studies, has crafted a cogent, revealing account of how a generation of American officials have grappled with dangerous developments in the post-Cold War era — the rise of an enduringly authoritarian China, the return of state-on-state conflict in Europe — that have produced a geopolitical mash-up of old and new.

Take the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. “Trench warfare!” Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said to Sanger about six months into the war. “For a while we thought this would be a cyber war. Then we thought it was looking like an old-fashioned, World War II tank war. And then, there are days when I thought they are fighting [expletive] World War I.” As Sanger writes: “Milley had put his finger on one of the most unsettling features of the new geopolitical era: It is part 1914, part 1941 and part 2022. All at once.”

Despite the book’s title, then, what Sanger depicts is less reminiscent of the Cold War than of earlier phases of geopolitical competition, in which interests mattered far more than ideology and the players were interdependent rather than split into blocs.

Sanger begins his tale with the crumbling of the so-called Washington Consensus that took hold in the 1990s: the belief that economic globalization and the spread of free markets would foster stability and secure American dominance of a “rules-based” international order.

Back then, Bill Clinton argued that China’s entry into the World Trade Organization and the rise of the World Wide Web would spur the country’s democratization. George W. Bush thought that sharing an enemy in the war on terrorism might lure Vladimir Putin closer to the West, even as NATO expanded to Russia’s borders. But “just about every assumption across different administrations was wrong,” an unnamed adviser to President Biden admits. “I was as guilty as anyone else.”

It’s a rare anonymous quote in a book built on extensive on-the-record interviews with an ensemble cast of foreign-policy professionals narrating their own efforts to adjust as reality ceased to conform to conventional expectations.

Sanger pays attention not only to the big-name principals but also to the cohort known in Washington as “the deputies”: the workhorses of national security who sometimes push for politically suboptimal but substantively sound policies — and who sometimes get overruled, only to find themselves vindicated by events.

Consider Kurt Campbell, a veteran Asia hand and an early skeptic of the decades-long elite consensus that aiding China’s economic growth and enmeshing it in the U.S.-led world order was, as he puts it, “almost a mystical thing that must be sustained.” Campbell served in the Clinton and Obama administrations; over time, he came to advocate a more aggressive approach to China. But his arguments went largely unheeded — until, strangely enough, the Trump era.

One theme that emerges in “New Cold Wars” is the surprising continuity between the Trump and Biden administrations when it comes to China. With Campbell as a top adviser on China, Biden has largely kept in place Donald Trump’s trade-war tariffs on Chinese goods , amped up Trump-era export restrictions to slow China’s technological progress and talked tough on Taiwan (albeit not with Trump’s bluster). Ironically, Sanger writes, “a handful of Trump’s aides laid the foundation for one of the signature efforts of the Biden administration.”

That said, Sanger draws a clear contrast between the two presidents. Biden is intensely focused on the gravity of the threats facing America. At a dinner for elite donors in 2022, he mused darkly — and in detail — about the ways that Putin could spark nuclear Armageddon. (“The room went silent,” Sanger writes.)

Trump has different preoccupations. In 2019, he asked Randall Stephenson, then the chief executive of AT&T, for a briefing on the threat posed by Chinese technology. According to Stephenson, Trump spent 45 minutes “riffing on how men got into trouble,” Sanger writes. “It was all about women and private planes.” A few minutes into Stephenson’s presentation, Trump shared his conclusions: “This is really boring.”

Sanger also deftly illustrates the challenges of deterrence. In the fall of 2022, at the peak of American alarm about Putin’s nuclear brinkmanship in Ukraine, Lloyd Austin, the U.S. secretary of defense, warned his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, that if the Russians used a tactical nuclear weapon, the United States would directly intervene and destroy, as one official recalls to Sanger, “what is left of your military in Ukraine.”

Shoigu bristled, but the warning seemed to work. There has, of course, been no nuclear strike and, as a Biden aide points out to Sanger, no Russian attacks on any of the bases in Poland that the United States uses to deliver weapons to Ukraine. On the other hand, “it was impossible to know whether Putin believed the threat,” Sanger writes. And perhaps with good reason: Some Biden aides admit to Sanger that they were unsure if the U.S. president would truly make good on it.

To craft a thorough and compelling first draft of history, Sanger focuses primarily on his American protagonists. But he shares some perspectives from non-Americans as well, such as Taiwanese officials who explain what it’s like to be trapped between America and China.

And he observes that much of the world seethes at “the hypocrisy of an America that often seems to care more about the fate of white Europeans” in places like Ukraine than about people in places like Gaza, where civilians are being killed in staggering numbers by a U.S. ally, Israel. In this mostly laudatory account of Biden’s foreign policy, the Gaza war is one area in which Sanger finds fault. Biden’s hesitancy to use American leverage to restrain Israel “looked and felt like a failure of clear leadership,” he writes.

“New Cold Wars” vividly captures the view from Washington. But, as Sanger makes clear, with America no longer an unchallenged hegemon, the fate of the U.S.-led order rests more than ever on the ideas, beliefs and emotions of people far outside the Beltway. One finishes this book wishing for equally comprehensive portraits of the view from elsewhere, especially Moscow and Beijing.

Don’t hold your breath, though: The American foreign policy establishment has erred many times, but the authoritarians it confronts (and the ones it coddles) would never allow a reporter like Sanger to peer inside their systems and reveal what he finds.

NEW COLD WARS : China’s Rise, Russia’s Invasion, and America’s Struggle to Defend the West | By David E. Sanger with Mary K. Brooks | Crown | 511 pp. | $33

Our Coverage of the War in Ukraine

News and Analysis

The top American military commander in Europe warned that Ukraine could lose the war with Russia  if the United States did not send more ammunition to Ukrainian forces, and fast.

Ukrainian lawmakers passed a mobilization law aimed at replenishing the nation’s exhausted and depleted fighting forces .

China’s top leader, Xi Jinping, and Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, met in Beijing . The visit came days after the United States threatened new sanctions against Chinese companies if they aided Russia’s war in Ukraine.

A U.S. Lawmaker Speaks Out : Representative Chuck Edwards, a Republican from North Carolina, has emerged as a vocal proponent of U.S. aid to Ukraine in a party that has grown hostile to it. He discussed his recent trip there  in a Q. and A.

Hollowing Out a Generation: Ukraine desperately needs new recruits, but it is running up against a critical demographic constraint long in the making: It has very few young men .

Conditional Support: Ukraine wants a formal invitation to join NATO, but the alliance has no appetite for taking on a new member  that would draw it into the biggest land war in Europe since 1945.

How We Verify Our Reporting

Our team of visual journalists analyzes satellite images, photographs , videos and radio transmissions  to independently confirm troop movements and other details.

We monitor and authenticate reports on social media, corroborating these with eyewitness accounts and interviews. Read more about our reporting efforts .

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers visit http://www.djreprints.com.

https://www.barrons.com/news/car-blast-in-moscow-wounds-ex-ukraine-security-officer-3afc2611

• FROM AFP NEWS

Car Blast In Moscow Wounds Ex-Ukraine Security Officer

• Order Reprints
• Print Article

An ex-officer of Ukraine's SBU security services was wounded Friday after his car was blown up in Moscow, Russian state media reported.

Vasily Prozorov received wounds to his hands and legs, a Russian security source told state news agency Ria Novosti.

A source in the emergency services told Russian media he was wounded after an explosive device was set off underneath his four-wheel drive outside his home in northern Moscow.

The anonymous source said the explosion happened as Prozorov started his car.

Footage published on social media showed part of the car exploding as a man entered it in a car park outside a residential building.

Russian state media quoted a source close to Prozorov --  also anonymously -- who said he was alive and that his life was not in danger.

"He is alive, everything is fine," the source was quoted as saying.

In March 2019, Prozorov gave a press conference in Moscow saying he moved for "ideological reasons."

RIA Novosti said Friday he had given an interview to the agency days before the apparent assassination attempt.

It quoted him as saying that he used to work for the SBU in Ukraine's southern Zaporizhzhia region, before moving to Kyiv in April 2014 and "contacted representatives of Russian security services and suggested cooperation".

"From the first days I started to work, giving information to the security services of the Russian Federation," he said.

A number of officials who have collaborated with Moscow have been targeted by assassination attempts in occupied Ukraine during Russia's two-year long offensive there.

An ex-officer of Ukraine's SBU security services was wounded Friday after his car was blown up in Moscow, Russian state media reported.

An error has occurred, please try again later.

This article has been sent to

• Cryptocurrencies
• Stock Picks
• Barron's Live
• Barron's Stock Screen
• Personal Finance
• Advisor Directory

Memberships

• Subscribe to Barron's
• Saved Articles
• Newsletters
• Video Center

Customer Service

• Customer Center
• The Wall Street Journal
• MarketWatch
• Investor's Business Daily
• Mansion Global
• Financial News London

For Business

• Corporate Subscriptions

For Education

• Investing in Education

For Advertisers

• Press & Media Inquiries
• Advertising
• Subscriber Benefits
• Manage Notifications
• Manage Alerts

About Barron's

• Live Events

Copyright ©2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit www.djreprints.com.

Donald Trump's historic New York hush money trial is set to start Monday: What to know

Barring a last-minute turn of events, a former American president will go on criminal trial for the first time in the nation's history on Monday.

Donald Trump is fighting 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. If convicted, the charges could land the presumptive Republican presidential nominee in prison: many legal experts say a realistic sentence ranges from just probation to as much as four years behind bars .

It's a case that is sure to divide the country. Republican voters delivered electoral victories for Trump in nearly every Republican primary held this year, despite knowing Trump faces four criminal cases, including the New York charges. Trump has portrayed both Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and trial Judge Juan Merchan as biased against him.

"There are some people who are just going to see this as a political trial, another one in New York where Trump is certainly not well liked," Hank Sheinkopf, a New York City-based political consultant who worked for former President Bill Clinton, told USA TODAY.

"And then there are others who will see this as a way to deal with an illegality that should not have occurred − we're talking about paying off a porno star," Sheinkopf said

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

Jury selection is set to start Monday, just over a year after Bragg announced the indictment against Trump on April 4, 2023. The trial is expected to last between six and eight weeks, according to a media advisory from the court.

A financial records case that starts with a sex story

Twelve jurors will be asked to decide whether the real estate mogul falsified business records at the Trump Organization in order to conceal or commit another crime − a purpose that turns the acts into felonies under New York law.

Prosecutors allege Trump reimbursed his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, for the $130,000 hush money payment through a series of checks, falsely labeling them as payments for legal services. That concealed a federal election law violation because the $130,000 payment was meant to help Trump's 2016 election and exceeded campaign contribution limits, according to the prosecution. They also say the records were meant to conceal plans to violate state tax and election laws.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to the charges and recently submitted a frenzy of legal filings trying to delay the trial, so far to no avail .

Dueling 'election interference' claims

Both sides have framed the case as being about election interference − but they are talking about different elections.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has said the case is about falsifying records in order to unlawfully interfere with the 2016 election.

"The core of it's not money for sex," Bragg said in a December WNYC radio interview. "We would say it's about conspiring to corrupt a presidential election and then lying in New York business records to cover it up."

Cohen paid Daniels less than two weeks before the Nov. 8 Election Day, and at a time when the Trump campaign was still reeling from the Oct. 7 release of the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape, in which Trump crudely described kissing women and grabbing their genitals. "When you're a star, they let you do it," he said.

Trump feared another scandal that could hurt his standing with female voters, according to prosecutors. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff," they said in a case document.

Trump has said the case – and all his criminal and civil cases – are intended to harm his prospects in the 2024 election. They represent "an illegal attack on a Political Opponent" and "Election Interference at its Best," he posted on his Truth Social media platform Wednesday.

Norman Eisen, a Brookings Institution senior fellow who served as special counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during Trump's first impeachment, agreed with Bragg's election-interference framing of the case.

"The reason that Donald Trump made hush money payments and then covered them up, triggering the financial falsification charges in New York, over 30 of them, is because he did not want another damaging sex scandal at the end of the 2016 election, right after Access Hollywood − it could have tanked him," Eisen told USA TODAY.

How the trial will unfold

The trial will start with jury selection, a days- or weeks-long process in which both sides will try to suss out potential personal agendas towards Trump.

After jury selection, the two sides are expected to make opening arguments. The prosecution will then call witnesses and introduce evidence, while Trump's team tries to poke holes in the prosecution's case. After that, Trump's side will have the option of putting on their own defense, including having Trump testify.

On Friday, Trump said at a Palm Beach press conference that he plans to testify in the New York trial.

"I’m testifying. I tell the truth. I mean, all I can do is tell the truth. And the truth is that there's no case, they have no case," Trump said .

More: Did Donald Trump rape E. Jean Carroll? Here's what a jury and judge said.

Trump also said he was going to testify when it was the defense's turn to call witnesses in his New York civil fraud case, but he backed out the day before his lawyers said he would take the stand. Trump did testify for just a few minutes in his latest of two trials against E. Jean Carroll, who sued him for defamation over his denials and attacks soon after she came forward with rape allegations against him.

Theoretically, the trial could be halted somewhere along the way. For example, a lawyer or witness could say something in front of jurors that the judge rules is improper and creates too much prejudice against one side or the other, forcing the judge to declare a mistrial.

If that doesn't happen, the two sides will give closing arguments, and then Trump's fate will be in the jury's hands.

Will the trial be televised?

The trial will not be televised, in keeping with general New York court policy. Reporters will be present in the courtroom as well as in at least one overflow room in which proceedings will be streamed.

Trump may hold press conferences outside the courthouse, or speak to the press in the hallway, as he has in his other court cases.

Who are the witnesses?

Testimony could be embarrassing for the former president, even if Trump disputes it. Stormy Daniels is on the prosecution's witness list and may share her story of having sex with Trump in 2006, soon after Melania Trump gave birth to their son, Barron. The former president vehemently denies Daniels' claim.

Judge Juan Merchan has also ruled that other witnesses who received hush money payments before the 2016 election may testify because steps taken to secure their stories "complete the narrative" in the prosecution's case.

That includes former Playboy model Karen McDougal. Prosecutors say she received $150,000 from the The National Enquirer's parent company, American Media Inc., to keep quiet about an alleged affair with Trump − which he denies.

Michael Cohen could also take a turn on the stand. Trump's team bitterly fought the proposition that he could testify at all, calling Cohen an admitted liar. Cohen stated at Trump's New York civil fraud trial  that he lied when he  pleaded guilty to federal tax evasion . He engaged in "tax omission," not tax evasion, he said.

However, Merchan said Trump hadn't shown Cohen had lied in this case, and Merchan hadn't found any applicable law or court ruling that blocked a prosecution witness from testifying because the witness's credibility was previously called into question.

Former White House spokesperson Hope Hicks is also expected to testify , according to NBC News  and  CNN , which cited a source familiar with the matter. Hicks was Trump's 2016 presidential campaign press secretary and may have been present for discussions about the Daniels hush money payment, according to court filings dealing with an FBI investigation . A lawyer for Hicks previously denied she participated in hush money payment conversations on Oct. 8, 2016, a day when she and Cohen spoke several times.

Who are the lawyers?

Ex-US Justice Department official Matthew Colangelo is expected to be a key player for the prosecution team. When he was in New York Attorney General Letitia James's office, he worked on the civil fraud investigation that ended with a $454 million judgment against Trump.

Trump is represented by Todd Blanche, who spent several years as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan, and Susan Necheles, a former state prosecutor.

"She's very experienced, she knows how to try cases," Diana Florence, a former Manhattan prosecutor, said about Necheles, whom she faced off against in multiple cases.

Trump "has certainly competent and able counsel," Florence added.

Social media PR campaign during trial?

Trump may keep antagonizing Merchan on social media, as part of his apparent strategy to portray judges who he believes are unfriendly as biased. He has called Merchan a "HIGHLY CONFLICTED & CORRUPT JUDGE, whose hatred for me has no bounds." He has also targeted Merchan's daughter , calling her "a Rabid Trump Hater" based on her marketing work for Democratic candidates, and posted a photo of her to his millions of followers on Truth Social. Merchan expanded a gag order to prohibit Trump from attacking Merchan's or Bragg's family.

"The average observer, must now, after hearing Defendant's recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves,  but for their loved ones as well ," Merchan wrote in that decision .

Could Trump go to prison?

While some long-time New York lawyers told USA TODAY they believed Trump could well be sentenced to incarceration if he's convicted, others predicted a sentence of just probation.

Trump would be a first-time, non-violent felony offender, but some defendants convicted on the same charges have gotten several months of incarceration in New York.

Merchan may view the case's tie to alleged interference in the 2016 election as warranting a longer sentence than typical for falsifying business records, some experts say.

If convicted, Trump would almost certainly appeal. Florence said he is very likely to remain free during his appeal.

It's unclear what any incarceration would look like for a former president who has around-the-clock Secret Service protection. Would it be jail or prison? Would it be house arrest or some alternative placement? It's uncharted territory.

More: Donald Trump could face prison time if he is convicted in upcoming NY hush money trial

The smallest case against Trump?

Some commentators who are concerned that Trump threatens American democracy and national security have bemoaned the fact that his first criminal trial comes in this case. The ex-president also faces charges in Georgia and Washington, D.C. of trying to overturn his 2020 election loss and in Florida of hoarding classified documents even after a subpoena, which many consider to be more serious offenses. Trump has pleaded not guilty in all the cases.

But some former prosecutors say the common perception that other cases are more significant doesn't mean Trump shouldn't be held to account in this case if he broke the law.

"The fact that it's not as bad as leading a revolt to destroy the American Republic leaves an awful lot of room," John Moscow, a New York lawyer who spent 30 years in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office, told USA TODAY.

Election Day approaches

Many Americans have said they believe the charges are significant. In an early April poll by Reuters/Ipsos of more than 1,000 adults, 64% of registered voters said the charges are at least "somewhat serious," compared to 34% who said they weren't. The remaining weren't sure or didn't answer.

But Sheinkopf said the trial could help Trump's 2024 campaign in certain ways.

"Those who love him will see this as just another way that the elites on both coasts – who they detest in the first place, which is why they love Trump – that the elites on both coasts are persecuting Donald Trump."

Sheinkopf added that it will also be an opportunity for Trump to show his skills in turning the courthouse into the campaign trail.

"It will be a great show because everything Donald Trump does is a great show. He is a master of presentation," Sheinkopf said.

Steven Hahn, a history professor at New York University, noted the trial is likely to bring out allegations of behavior by Trump that don't look very good to most people. He predicted a felony conviction will damage Trump politically.

"I just can't see how it could help him except solidify the support of people who are basically utterly committed to him," Hahn told USA TODAY.

Then again, many believed Trump's presidential prospects were over after the October, 2016 release of the "Access Hollywood" tape, Hahn acknowledged.

"He has amazing capacities − he's like a political Houdini," Hahn said.

Contributing: Dan Morrison