ICE and WSJF are score-based prioritisation methods. ICE multiplies impact, confidence and ease, each from 1 to 10. WSJF divides the cost of delay (user and business value, time criticality and risk reduction or opportunity enablement) by the job size, favouring work that delivers a lot of value early. Value × risk splits items into four quadrants. Each model answers a different question about what to do first.
How to use
- Choose the model: ICE, WSJF or value × risk.
- Write one item per row (up to 30) or import the items from the RICE calculator.
- Fill in the columns for the chosen model; each column label says which model it belongs to.
- See the sorted table, the chart or the matrix, and read the warnings about empty columns.
- Switch the model to compare the order, then export as PNG, CSV or Markdown.
What each field asks for
| Field | What to enter |
|---|---|
| Model | Each model uses only its own table columns; the others stay saved for comparison. |
| Item | E.g. bulk invoice issuing |
| ICE and value × risk: impact | 1 to 10 |
| ICE: confidence | 1 to 10 |
| ICE: ease | 1 to 10 |
| WSJF: value | For users and the business. 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20 |
| WSJF: time criticality | How much value drops if it waits |
| WSJF: risk or opportunity | Risk it reduces or path it opens |
| WSJF: job size | Relative effort |
| Value × risk: risk | 1 to 10 |
Example
A billing software team compares five items with WSJF. Compliance with the new tax rule has value 5, time criticality 20 and risk reduction 13: a cost of delay of 38, divided by a job size of 5, gives 7.6, first place. The overdue payments dashboard is worth little (cost of delay 9) but is small (size 2), so it comes second with 4.5. The mobile app has a cost of delay of 16 and a size of 20: 0.8, last. With ICE, the tax rule still comes first, with 324 points.
When to use
- When deadlines and market windows weigh on the decision: WSJF makes time criticality explicit.
- For a quick first ranking of growth ideas or experiments, with ICE.
- To separate safe bets from risky ones before building the roadmap, with value × risk.
- To check whether the order survives another model: if the top places change a lot, the assumptions deserve discussion.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between ICE and RICE?
ICE uses impact, confidence and ease, without separating reach. It is quicker and suits lists of experiments. RICE separates how many people the item reaches, which helps when the audience of each item varies a lot.
How do I score WSJF?
Score one column at a time, comparing the items with each other: the smallest gets 1 and the rest get values relative to it. Do this for value, time criticality, risk reduction or opportunity, and job size. Scoring column by column reduces the pull of a favourite item.
Why use the 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 20 scale?
The growing gaps force choices: it is hard to say whether something is an 11 or a 12, but easy to say whether it is an 8 or a 13. A relative scale also reminds everyone that the score compares items rather than measuring absolute value. The tool accepts other numbers and warns when they fall outside the scale.
What is cost of delay?
It is how much value is lost by waiting. In WSJF it adds user and business value, time criticality (how fast value drops, as with a regulatory deadline) and the risk the item reduces or the opportunity it opens.
When should I use value × risk?
When the main question is how much each bet could go wrong. High value, low risk items go first; high value, high risk items need a test or a smaller slice first; low value, high risk items stay out.
Which model should I choose?
WSJF when deadlines and dependencies matter, ICE for a quick pass over ideas and experiments, value × risk to balance a portfolio of bets. Since the list is the same, it is worth running two models and discussing where the order differs.
How does the import from the RICE calculator work?
RICE impact becomes ICE impact (3 becomes 10, 2 becomes 8, 1 becomes 6) and WSJF value (3 becomes 13, 2 becomes 8, 1 becomes 5). Confidence of 100, 80 and 50 becomes 10, 8 and 5. Effort becomes ease and job size by bands. Time criticality, risk reduction and risk stay empty for the team to estimate.