Product Manager project
Prioritize a messy feature list with a named framework
6-8 realistic candidate features scored with RICE (or similar) — graded on whether the reasoning is consistent and defensible, not the framework name-drop.
The brief
Invent a realistic product context (e.g. a job-search app) and a list of 6-8 candidate features with rough effort estimates and stated business goals. Score and rank them using a named prioritization framework (RICE or similar), applying it consistently across every item, and write the reasoning behind your top 3 and bottom 2 choices.
Suggested stack
What you hand in
- A published, viewable doc link with the feature list, scores, and reasoning
- Each feature's score is broken down by the framework's individual components, not just a final number
- A short section flagging which score inputs were confident vs. which were rough guesses
Grading happens against the rubric below, so read it before you start — not after.
How this is graded
Published in advance and weighted out of 100. Nothing here is a surprise.
The same scoring logic and level of rigor is used for every feature — not real numbers for some and guesses for others with no flag.
Each of the top-3 and bottom-2 explanations connects the score back to the specific stated business goal, not a generic "this is important".
At least one feature is explicitly framed as a trade-off (e.g. high impact but high effort, or fast but low-impact) rather than presenting every top choice as a free win.
The reasoning is detailed enough that a stakeholder pushing back on the ranking in a live conversation could be answered from the doc alone.
No console errors or crashes, no broken layout, no leftover placeholder text or commented-out code.
Why this project is worth your weekend
- Prioritization frameworks are asked about in nearly every PM interview, and applying one to a real messy list is what separates knowing the acronym from using it.
- Every real roadmap conversation is a negotiation over trade-offs, and this exercise forces naming them explicitly instead of hand-waving.
- A defensible ranking is what a PM actually needs to survive a stakeholder pushback meeting, not just produce a spreadsheet.
Where people lose points
- Applying the framework inconsistently — real numbers for one feature's reach estimate and a guess for another's, with no flag.
- Choosing a top feature purely because it was cheapest to build, with no connection back to the stated business goal.
- Presenting the ranking as if every score is equally certain instead of flagging which inputs were rough estimates.
Other Product Manager projects
Two or three of these turn an empty resume into a portfolio.
Built it? Get it scored against this rubric.
Submit your work and get a score on every criterion above, written feedback, and three resume bullets you can use straight away.