Opportunity Scoring And Why It Matters In Business

Opportunity scoring is a product feature prioritization framework. It asks customers to identify features they deem important but that are otherwise underdeveloped or disappointing. Opportunity scoring is derived from the outcome-driven innovation (ODI) strategy developed by Tony Ulwick in the 1990s. It is a user-centric process that gives product teams direct access to customers and their associated needs and wants. 

Opportunity ScoringKey ElementsAnalysisImplicationsApplicationsExamples
DefinitionOpportunity Scoring is a systematic method for evaluating and prioritizing opportunities or ideas based on predefined criteria. It helps organizations make informed decisions about which opportunities to pursue and allocate resources to the most promising ones.Analyzing Opportunity Scoring involves understanding the criteria and metrics used for evaluation. Organizations define specific factors, such as market potential, feasibility, and alignment with strategic goals, to assess opportunities objectively. The scoring process assigns numerical values to these criteria.Opportunity Scoring provides a structured approach to decision-making, ensuring that resources are allocated efficiently to opportunities with the highest potential. It minimizes subjective bias and promotes transparency in the evaluation process. Effective scoring helps organizations focus on opportunities that align with their strategic objectives.Opportunity Scoring aids organizations in making informed choices about resource allocation, project selection, and strategic investments. It enables better decision-making by considering both quantitative and qualitative factors.– New product development: Prioritizing product ideas based on market demand, technical feasibility, and profitability. – Investment decisions: Evaluating potential projects or ventures to determine their alignment with strategic goals and expected returns. – Resource allocation: Allocating budget, manpower, and time to initiatives that offer the greatest value and impact. – Strategic planning: Identifying growth opportunities and competitive advantages to inform long-term strategies.
CriteriaCriteria are the specific factors or attributes used to evaluate opportunities. These criteria can vary depending on the organization’s goals and industry. Common criteria include market size, profitability, risk, feasibility, and strategic alignment.Analyzing criteria involves defining and customizing them to suit the organization’s needs. Criteria should be relevant, measurable, and aligned with strategic objectives. The choice of criteria can significantly impact the scoring process and the outcome of opportunity evaluation.Criteria serve as the foundation for opportunity evaluation. They guide decision-makers in assessing the suitability and potential of opportunities. Well-defined criteria ensure that evaluations are consistent, objective, and based on relevant factors.Criteria selection is critical and should reflect the organization’s priorities and objectives. Regular review and adjustment of criteria are necessary to adapt to changing market conditions and business goals.– Market potential: Assessing the size, growth rate, and demand for a new product or service in a specific market segment. – Feasibility: Evaluating the technical, operational, and financial feasibility of a project or initiative. – Strategic fit: Determining how well an opportunity aligns with the organization’s long-term goals and competitive strategy. – Risk assessment: Analyzing potential risks and their impact on the success of the opportunity.
Scoring MethodThe scoring method defines how criteria are weighted and how scores are assigned to opportunities. It can be a simple numerical scale (e.g., 1 to 5) or a more complex system that considers the relative importance of criteria. The method ensures a consistent and objective evaluation process.Analyzing the scoring method involves determining the weight assigned to each criterion and the scoring scale used (e.g., 1 to 10 or 0% to 100%). The method should reflect the organization’s priorities, and criteria weights should sum up to 100% to maintain consistency. The choice of method affects the overall opportunity scores.The scoring method quantifies the evaluation process, allowing opportunities to be ranked based on their total scores. It provides a basis for comparison and helps decision-makers identify the most promising opportunities. The method ensures that both quantitative and qualitative factors are considered in the assessment.The scoring method plays a crucial role in opportunity prioritization and resource allocation. Organizations should ensure that the method is transparent and well-documented to maintain credibility and trust in the evaluation process.– Weighted scoring: Assigning different weights to criteria based on their importance, allowing for a more nuanced evaluation. – Simple scoring: Using a straightforward numerical scale to rate opportunities on each criterion, with equal importance for all factors. – Comparative scoring: Comparing opportunities directly against each other on each criterion to determine their relative rankings. – Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA): Employing advanced techniques to account for complex interdependencies and trade-offs among criteria.
Opportunity ScoresOpportunity scores are numerical values assigned to each opportunity based on the criteria and scoring method. Higher scores indicate more favorable opportunities. These scores allow for objective comparison and ranking of opportunities.Analyzing opportunity scores involves calculating them for each opportunity by applying the defined criteria and scoring method. The scores provide a quantitative representation of the opportunities’ potential and alignment with organizational goals. The opportunities with the highest scores are considered the most promising.Opportunity scores facilitate decision-making by providing a clear and objective basis for comparing and prioritizing opportunities. They help organizations focus their efforts and resources on initiatives with the greatest potential for success. Effective scoring leads to better resource allocation and strategic decision-making.Opportunity scores are essential for creating a prioritized list of opportunities, enabling organizations to invest time, money, and effort wisely. They serve as a reference point for discussions, stakeholder communication, and project planning.– Opportunity A: Score of 82, indicating strong potential and alignment with strategic goals. – Opportunity B: Score of 65, suggesting moderate potential but some concerns about feasibility. – Opportunity C: Score of 47, signaling limited potential and a lower alignment with strategic objectives. – Opportunity D: Score of 93, indicating exceptional potential and a strong fit with the organization’s long-term vision.
Resource AllocationOnce opportunities are scored and ranked, organizations can allocate resources based on their scores and strategic importance. This step involves decision-making about funding, manpower, time, and other resources to pursue the selected opportunities.Analyzing resource allocation involves making decisions about the allocation of resources based on opportunity scores and available resources. High-scoring opportunities typically receive more resources, while lower-scoring ones may receive limited or no resources. Resource allocation should align with strategic goals and constraints.Resource allocation based on opportunity scores ensures that organizations invest their resources where they are likely to yield the best returns. It optimizes resource utilization, minimizes risks, and enhances the likelihood of success. Effective allocation requires coordination and monitoring throughout the implementation phase.Resource allocation decisions have a significant impact on an organization’s ability to execute its strategies and achieve its objectives. It involves budgeting, staffing, project planning, and setting timelines for opportunity execution. Careful consideration of resource allocation enhances the organization’s ability to seize valuable opportunities.– Allocating a larger budget to Opportunity A due to its high score and strategic significance. – Assigning a dedicated project team to Opportunity D to ensure its successful development. – Allocating minimal resources to Opportunity C due to its limited potential and low alignment with strategic goals. – Monitoring resource utilization and adjusting allocations as needed based on opportunity progress and changing circumstances.
Continuous ReviewOpportunity Scoring is not a one-time process. It requires continuous review and reassessment of opportunities, criteria, and scoring methods. Changing market conditions, new data, and evolving strategies may necessitate adjustments in opportunity evaluations.Analyzing continuous review involves periodically revisiting and reevaluating the opportunities in the pipeline. It includes updating criteria, revising scoring methods, and incorporating new information or insights. Continuous review ensures that opportunity assessments remain relevant and aligned with organizational goals.Continuous review is essential to adapt to dynamic business environments and stay responsive to emerging opportunities and threats. It allows organizations to refine their decision-making processes, identify course corrections, and reallocate resources as needed. It promotes agility and ensures that opportunities are pursued strategically.Continuous review fosters a culture of adaptability and learning within organizations. It encourages feedback loops, data-driven decision-making, and the incorporation of lessons learned from previous opportunities. Organizations that embrace continuous review are better equipped to thrive in rapidly changing markets.– Quarterly review meetings to assess the progress and relevance of existing opportunities. – Updating criteria and weights to reflect changing market dynamics or shifts in strategic focus. – Incorporating feedback from stakeholders and project teams to improve the scoring process. – Reevaluating the portfolio of opportunities to identify new growth areas and divest from low-performing ventures.

Understanding opportunity scoring

Opportunity scoring is closely related to the Jobs To Be Done (JTBD) methodology, also one of Ulwick’s creations. With respect to JTBD, the key to maximum product value is determining the goals and desired outcomes of the user. In other words, what job does the product empower a user to complete?

Given the similarity of both approaches, it’s useful to think of opportunity scoring as an additional layer of JTBD. Customers are asked to identify important product features they feel are underdeveloped or indeed absent entirely. This removes the guesswork out of product design, shifting the focus from theory-based to practical-based product development.

Opportunity scoring differs from other product prioritization approaches such as the Value vs. Complexity analysis. Instead, think of opportunity scoring as an importance-versus-satisfaction analysis that seeks to make product innovation more predictable.

Conducting opportunity scoring

To conduct an opportunity scoring analysis, businesses must follow these steps:

1 – Create lists

Begin by creating a list of product features and the associated results (outcomes) of each feature.

2 – Survey customers with a scoring system

Then, survey a group of customers by asking them two questions:

  • How important is this feature or outcome to you?
  • How satisfied are you with how the product delivers this feature or outcome?

Both questions are rated on a scale of 1-5, where 1 denotes low importance/satisfaction and 5 denotes high importance/satisfaction.

3 – Analyse the results

Any features receiving a high importance rating coupled with a low satisfaction level should be investigated further. These will likely yield a significant ROI for the business but in any case, product teams must also consider the associated costs of seizing such an opportunity.

Features deemed low importance and low satisfaction can be ignored or removed altogether. This frees up resources to enhance other product features.

4 – Further detailed analysis (optional)

When scoring product features, opportunity scoring gives importance and satisfaction equal weight. However, some product teams may choose to borrow concepts from Ulwick’s ODI methodology. In this case, the value of user importance is doubled in relation to satisfaction

With an emphasis on gauging the outcomes customers value most, a thorough understanding of their goals and motivations is crucial. Again, the features or outcomes most suited to innovation are those that have high importance values coupled with low satisfaction values. 

Key takeaways:

  • Opportunity scoring is a product prioritization framework. It asks customers to score features based on their relative importance and how satisfied they are with each.
  • Opportunity scoring is closely related to the Jobs To Be Done (JTBD) methodology, which has a focus on understanding the goals and desired outcomes of the end user.
  • Opportunity scoring is an importance-versus-satisfaction analysis that seeks to make innovation more predictable. Product teams can deepen the analysis by giving importance values double weight.

Key Highlights

  • Understanding Opportunity Scoring: Opportunity scoring is a method of prioritizing product features. It involves asking customers to rate the importance of underdeveloped or lacking features. This approach is derived from Tony Ulwick’s Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) strategy, focusing on user needs and wants.
  • Opportunity Scoring vs. Jobs To Be Done (JTBD): Opportunity scoring is linked to the Jobs To Be Done methodology. It adds a layer to JTBD by having customers identify crucial but underdeveloped features. This shifts product design from theory-based to practical-based development.
  • Conducting Opportunity Scoring Analysis:
    1. Create Lists: List product features and their associated outcomes.
    2. Survey Customers: Ask customers about feature importance and satisfaction, rating each on a scale of 1-5.
    3. Analyze Results: Investigate features with high importance but low satisfaction, considering potential ROI and costs.
    4. Detailed Analysis (Optional): Some teams may double the importance weight. Understanding customer goals and motivations is crucial.
  • Key Takeaways:
    • Opportunity scoring prioritizes features by having customers score their importance and satisfaction.
    • It relates to JTBD, emphasizing user goals and outcomes.
    • Opportunity scoring aims for more predictable innovation by analyzing importance and satisfaction.
    • Teams can enhance analysis by giving importance double weight for deeper insights.

Connected Agile & Lean Frameworks


AIOps is the application of artificial intelligence to IT operations. It has become particularly useful for modern IT management in hybridized, distributed, and dynamic environments. AIOps has become a key operational component of modern digital-based organizations, built around software and algorithms.


AgileSHIFT is a framework that prepares individuals for transformational change by creating a culture of agility.

Agile Methodology

Agile started as a lightweight development method compared to heavyweight software development, which is the core paradigm of the previous decades of software development. By 2001 the Manifesto for Agile Software Development was born as a set of principles that defined the new paradigm for software development as a continuous iteration. This would also influence the way of doing business.

Agile Program Management

Agile Program Management is a means of managing, planning, and coordinating interrelated work in such a way that value delivery is emphasized for all key stakeholders. Agile Program Management (AgilePgM) is a disciplined yet flexible agile approach to managing transformational change within an organization.

Agile Project Management

Agile project management (APM) is a strategy that breaks large projects into smaller, more manageable tasks. In the APM methodology, each project is completed in small sections – often referred to as iterations. Each iteration is completed according to its project life cycle, beginning with the initial design and progressing to testing and then quality assurance.

Agile Modeling

Agile Modeling (AM) is a methodology for modeling and documenting software-based systems. Agile Modeling is critical to the rapid and continuous delivery of software. It is a collection of values, principles, and practices that guide effective, lightweight software modeling.

Agile Business Analysis

Agile Business Analysis (AgileBA) is certification in the form of guidance and training for business analysts seeking to work in agile environments. To support this shift, AgileBA also helps the business analyst relate Agile projects to a wider organizational mission or strategy. To ensure that analysts have the necessary skills and expertise, AgileBA certification was developed.

Agile Leadership

Agile leadership is the embodiment of agile manifesto principles by a manager or management team. Agile leadership impacts two important levels of a business. The structural level defines the roles, responsibilities, and key performance indicators. The behavioral level describes the actions leaders exhibit to others based on agile principles. 

Andon System

The andon system alerts managerial, maintenance, or other staff of a production process problem. The alert itself can be activated manually with a button or pull cord, but it can also be activated automatically by production equipment. Most Andon boards utilize three colored lights similar to a traffic signal: green (no errors), yellow or amber (problem identified, or quality check needed), and red (production stopped due to unidentified issue).

Bimodal Portfolio Management

Bimodal Portfolio Management (BimodalPfM) helps an organization manage both agile and traditional portfolios concurrently. Bimodal Portfolio Management – sometimes referred to as bimodal development – was coined by research and advisory company Gartner. The firm argued that many agile organizations still needed to run some aspects of their operations using traditional delivery models.

Business Innovation Matrix

Business innovation is about creating new opportunities for an organization to reinvent its core offerings, revenue streams, and enhance the value proposition for existing or new customers, thus renewing its whole business model. Business innovation springs by understanding the structure of the market, thus adapting or anticipating those changes.

Business Model Innovation

Business model innovation is about increasing the success of an organization with existing products and technologies by crafting a compelling value proposition able to propel a new business model to scale up customers and create a lasting competitive advantage. And it all starts by mastering the key customers.

Constructive Disruption

A consumer brand company like Procter & Gamble (P&G) defines “Constructive Disruption” as: a willingness to change, adapt, and create new trends and technologies that will shape our industry for the future. According to P&G, it moves around four pillars: lean innovation, brand building, supply chain, and digitalization & data analytics.

Continuous Innovation

That is a process that requires a continuous feedback loop to develop a valuable product and build a viable business model. Continuous innovation is a mindset where products and services are designed and delivered to tune them around the customers’ problem and not the technical solution of its founders.

Design Sprint

A design sprint is a proven five-day process where critical business questions are answered through speedy design and prototyping, focusing on the end-user. A design sprint starts with a weekly challenge that should finish with a prototype, test at the end, and therefore a lesson learned to be iterated.

Design Thinking

Tim Brown, Executive Chair of IDEO, defined design thinking as “a human-centered approach to innovation that draws from the designer’s toolkit to integrate the needs of people, the possibilities of technology, and the requirements for business success.” Therefore, desirability, feasibility, and viability are balanced to solve critical problems.


DevOps refers to a series of practices performed to perform automated software development processes. It is a conjugation of the term “development” and “operations” to emphasize how functions integrate across IT teams. DevOps strategies promote seamless building, testing, and deployment of products. It aims to bridge a gap between development and operations teams to streamline the development altogether.

Dual Track Agile

Product discovery is a critical part of agile methodologies, as its aim is to ensure that products customers love are built. Product discovery involves learning through a raft of methods, including design thinking, lean start-up, and A/B testing to name a few. Dual Track Agile is an agile methodology containing two separate tracks: the “discovery” track and the “delivery” track.

eXtreme Programming

eXtreme Programming was developed in the late 1990s by Ken Beck, Ron Jeffries, and Ward Cunningham. During this time, the trio was working on the Chrysler Comprehensive Compensation System (C3) to help manage the company payroll system. eXtreme Programming (XP) is a software development methodology. It is designed to improve software quality and the ability of software to adapt to changing customer needs.

Feature-Driven Development

Feature-Driven Development is a pragmatic software process that is client and architecture-centric. Feature-Driven Development (FDD) is an agile software development model that organizes workflow according to which features need to be developed next.

Gemba Walk

A Gemba Walk is a fundamental component of lean management. It describes the personal observation of work to learn more about it. Gemba is a Japanese word that loosely translates as “the real place”, or in business, “the place where value is created”. The Gemba Walk as a concept was created by Taiichi Ohno, the father of the Toyota Production System of lean manufacturing. Ohno wanted to encourage management executives to leave their offices and see where the real work happened. This, he hoped, would build relationships between employees with vastly different skillsets and build trust.

GIST Planning

GIST Planning is a relatively easy and lightweight agile approach to product planning that favors autonomous working. GIST Planning is a lean and agile methodology that was created by former Google product manager Itamar Gilad. GIST Planning seeks to address this situation by creating lightweight plans that are responsive and adaptable to change. GIST Planning also improves team velocity, autonomy, and alignment by reducing the pervasive influence of management. It consists of four blocks: goals, ideas, step-projects, and tasks.

ICE Scoring

The ICE Scoring Model is an agile methodology that prioritizes features using data according to three components: impact, confidence, and ease of implementation. The ICE Scoring Model was initially created by author and growth expert Sean Ellis to help companies expand. Today, the model is broadly used to prioritize projects, features, initiatives, and rollouts. It is ideally suited for early-stage product development where there is a continuous flow of ideas and momentum must be maintained.

Innovation Funnel

An innovation funnel is a tool or process ensuring only the best ideas are executed. In a metaphorical sense, the funnel screens innovative ideas for viability so that only the best products, processes, or business models are launched to the market. An innovation funnel provides a framework for the screening and testing of innovative ideas for viability.

Innovation Matrix

According to how well defined is the problem and how well defined the domain, we have four main types of innovations: basic research (problem and domain or not well defined); breakthrough innovation (domain is not well defined, the problem is well defined); sustaining innovation (both problem and domain are well defined); and disruptive innovation (domain is well defined, the problem is not well defined).

Innovation Theory

The innovation loop is a methodology/framework derived from the Bell Labs, which produced innovation at scale throughout the 20th century. They learned how to leverage a hybrid innovation management model based on science, invention, engineering, and manufacturing at scale. By leveraging individual genius, creativity, and small/large groups.

Lean vs. Agile

The Agile methodology has been primarily thought of for software development (and other business disciplines have also adopted it). Lean thinking is a process improvement technique where teams prioritize the value streams to improve it continuously. Both methodologies look at the customer as the key driver to improvement and waste reduction. Both methodologies look at improvement as something continuous.

Lean Startup

A startup company is a high-tech business that tries to build a scalable business model in tech-driven industries. A startup company usually follows a lean methodology, where continuous innovation, driven by built-in viral loops is the rule. Thus, driving growth and building network effects as a consequence of this strategy.

Minimum Viable Product

As pointed out by Eric Ries, a minimum viable product is that version of a new product which allows a team to collect the maximum amount of validated learning about customers with the least effort through a cycle of build, measure, learn; that is the foundation of the lean startup methodology.

Leaner MVP

A leaner MVP is the evolution of the MPV approach. Where the market risk is validated before anything else


Kanban is a lean manufacturing framework first developed by Toyota in the late 1940s. The Kanban framework is a means of visualizing work as it moves through identifying potential bottlenecks. It does that through a process called just-in-time (JIT) manufacturing to optimize engineering processes, speed up manufacturing products, and improve the go-to-market strategy.


Jidoka was first used in 1896 by Sakichi Toyoda, who invented a textile loom that would stop automatically when it encountered a defective thread. Jidoka is a Japanese term used in lean manufacturing. The term describes a scenario where machines cease operating without human intervention when a problem or defect is discovered.

PDCA Cycle

The PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle was first proposed by American physicist and engineer Walter A. Shewhart in the 1920s. The PDCA cycle is a continuous process and product improvement method and an essential component of the lean manufacturing philosophy.

Rational Unified Process

Rational unified process (RUP) is an agile software development methodology that breaks the project life cycle down into four distinct phases.

Rapid Application Development

RAD was first introduced by author and consultant James Martin in 1991. Martin recognized and then took advantage of the endless malleability of software in designing development models. Rapid Application Development (RAD) is a methodology focusing on delivering rapidly through continuous feedback and frequent iterations.

Retrospective Analysis

Retrospective analyses are held after a project to determine what worked well and what did not. They are also conducted at the end of an iteration in Agile project management. Agile practitioners call these meetings retrospectives or retros. They are an effective way to check the pulse of a project team, reflect on the work performed to date, and reach a consensus on how to tackle the next sprint cycle. These are the five stages of a retrospective analysis for effective Agile project management: set the stage, gather the data, generate insights, decide on the next steps, and close the retrospective.

Scaled Agile

Scaled Agile Lean Development (ScALeD) helps businesses discover a balanced approach to agile transition and scaling questions. The ScALed approach helps businesses successfully respond to change. Inspired by a combination of lean and agile values, ScALed is practitioner-based and can be completed through various agile frameworks and practices.


The SMED (single minute exchange of die) method is a lean production framework to reduce waste and increase production efficiency. The SMED method is a framework for reducing the time associated with completing an equipment changeover.

Spotify Model

The Spotify Model is an autonomous approach to scaling agile, focusing on culture communication, accountability, and quality. The Spotify model was first recognized in 2012 after Henrik Kniberg, and Anders Ivarsson released a white paper detailing how streaming company Spotify approached agility. Therefore, the Spotify model represents an evolution of agile.

Test-Driven Development

As the name suggests, TDD is a test-driven technique for delivering high-quality software rapidly and sustainably. It is an iterative approach based on the idea that a failing test should be written before any code for a feature or function is written. Test-Driven Development (TDD) is an approach to software development that relies on very short development cycles.


Timeboxing is a simple yet powerful time-management technique for improving productivity. Timeboxing describes the process of proactively scheduling a block of time to spend on a task in the future. It was first described by author James Martin in a book about agile software development.


Scrum is a methodology co-created by Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland for effective team collaboration on complex products. Scrum was primarily thought for software development projects to deliver new software capability every 2-4 weeks. It is a sub-group of agile also used in project management to improve startups’ productivity.


Scrumban is a project management framework that is a hybrid of two popular agile methodologies: Scrum and Kanban. Scrumban is a popular approach to helping businesses focus on the right strategic tasks while simultaneously strengthening their processes.

Scrum Anti-Patterns

Scrum anti-patterns describe any attractive, easy-to-implement solution that ultimately makes a problem worse. Therefore, these are the practice not to follow to prevent issues from emerging. Some classic examples of scrum anti-patterns comprise absent product owners, pre-assigned tickets (making individuals work in isolation), and discounting retrospectives (where review meetings are not useful to really make improvements).

Scrum At Scale

Scrum at Scale (Scrum@Scale) is a framework that Scrum teams use to address complex problems and deliver high-value products. Scrum at Scale was created through a joint venture between the Scrum Alliance and Scrum Inc. The joint venture was overseen by Jeff Sutherland, a co-creator of Scrum and one of the principal authors of the Agile Manifesto.

Six Sigma

Six Sigma is a data-driven approach and methodology for eliminating errors or defects in a product, service, or process. Six Sigma was developed by Motorola as a management approach based on quality fundamentals in the early 1980s. A decade later, it was popularized by General Electric who estimated that the methodology saved them $12 billion in the first five years of operation.

Stretch Objectives

Stretch objectives describe any task an agile team plans to complete without expressly committing to do so. Teams incorporate stretch objectives during a Sprint or Program Increment (PI) as part of Scaled Agile. They are used when the agile team is unsure of its capacity to attain an objective. Therefore, stretch objectives are instead outcomes that, while extremely desirable, are not the difference between the success or failure of each sprint.

Toyota Production System

The Toyota Production System (TPS) is an early form of lean manufacturing created by auto-manufacturer Toyota. Created by the Toyota Motor Corporation in the 1940s and 50s, the Toyota Production System seeks to manufacture vehicles ordered by customers most quickly and efficiently possible.

Total Quality Management

The Total Quality Management (TQM) framework is a technique based on the premise that employees continuously work on their ability to provide value to customers. Importantly, the word “total” means that all employees are involved in the process – regardless of whether they work in development, production, or fulfillment.


The waterfall model was first described by Herbert D. Benington in 1956 during a presentation about the software used in radar imaging during the Cold War. Since there were no knowledge-based, creative software development strategies at the time, the waterfall method became standard practice. The waterfall model is a linear and sequential project management framework. 

Read Also: Continuous InnovationAgile MethodologyLean StartupBusiness Model InnovationProject Management.

Read Next: Agile Methodology, Lean Methodology, Agile Project Management, Scrum, Kanban, Six Sigma.

Main Guides:

Main Case Studies:

About The Author

Scroll to Top