Project Smart ~ Exploring trends and developments in project management today

Calendar iconNot recorded
Adobe PDF icon

MoSCoW Method

~ By Duncan Haughey

MoSCoW written on a blackboard

When managing a project, it is important to develop a clear understanding of the customers' requirements and their priority. Many projects start with the barest headline list of requirements, only to find later the customers' needs have not been fully understood.

Once there is a clear set of requirements, it is important to ensure they are ranked. This helps everyone (customer, project manager, designer, developers) understand the most important requirements, in what order to develop them, and those that won't be delivered if there is pressure on resources.

So what is the best method for creating a prioritised list of requirements?

The MoSCoW method can help. MoSCoW stands for must, should, could and would:

  • M - Must have this requirement to meet the business needs
  • S - Should have this requirement if possible, but project success does not rely on it
  • C - Could have this requirement if it does not affect anything else in the project
  • W - Would like to have this requirement later, but it won't be delivered this time

The O's in MoSCoW are added to make the acronym pronounceable, and are often left in lowercase to show they don't stand for anything.

MoSCoW as a prioritisation method is used to decide which requirements must be completed first and which must come later or will not be completed at all.

Unlike a numbering system for setting priorities, the words mean something and make it easier to discuss what's important. The must requirements need to provide a coherent solution, and alone lead to project success.

The must requirements are non-negotiable and have to be delivered. Failure to deliver even one of the must requirements will likely mean the project has failed.

The project team should aim to deliver as many of the should requirements as possible. Could and would requirements are 'nice to have' and do not affect the overall success of the project. Could requirements are the first to go if the project timeline or budget comes under pressure.

To deliver a successful project, it is essential that a clear set of prioritised requirements are agreed with the customer, alongside the overall objective, quality, timescale and budget. The recommended method for setting priorities is MoSCoW.


MoSCoW was developed by Dai Clegg of Oracle UK in 1994, and has been made popular by exponents of the Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM).


Comments (8)

5/5 (7)
Gravatar
8th September 2014 6:00pm
Nicole Yaniz (Mokena) says...
Does anyone have a good template they use?
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarEmpty StarEmpty Star
22nd July 2014 1:54am
Chu (Yangon) says...
Please explain to me about W. It is won't or want. In my first textbook (Agile), it is named as Won't. It is named as Want in Database Frameworks and method.
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarFull Star
25th July 2014 8:50am
Duncan Haughey (London) says...
I don't think it really matters whether it is Won't or Want as long as the intent is clear. It is not worth debating which it should be. Won't, want and would are all used and quoted depending on where you look. Personally, I like would, as in, "I would like to have this requirement, but will leave it out this time for consideration at a later date".
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarFull Star
21st June 2014 3:53pm
Christina (Athens) says...
Just a point. For the prioritization that involves 3rd party priorities (regulation, legislation) I use "Ought" as well.
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarFull Star
18th June 2014 9:39pm
Dan Brenner (Lakewood) says...
The PMBOK has not defined this anywhere, and it isn't in the PMI lexicon either.
  • Must, Should, Could, Would is the "all positive" project manager.
  • Must, Should, Can't, Won't is the "all negative" project manager.
  • Must, Should, Could, Won't is the "balanced" project manager.
I prefer the balanced approach as it allows you to define some things that have been defined as 'out of scope', while still giving a middle ground of things that you could decide to include in the project.
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarEmpty Star
18th June 2014 8:33pm
Yaroslav (Slavutich) says...
"W" does not mean "Would", it means "Won't" this is confused.
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarFull Star
18th June 2014 9:32pm
Duncan Haughey (London) says...
I'm not sure won't is correct either. I believe the definitive definition is:

'Want to have but will not have this time round'.

This is applied to those requirements that can wait until later development takes place.

Whether you use would, won't or want - these requirements aren't going to be delivered this time round.
Gravatar
Full StarFull StarFull StarFull StarFull Star
21st June 2014 6:00pm
Shilpa Adavelli (Chicago) says...
For requirements prioritization, BABOK says 'W' is for 'Won't', not 'Would' or 'Want' but not necessarily everybody follows the BABOK, so I guess 'Would' would work for some organizations. As long as it is clearly defined what the expectation is and what 'W' stands for, I don't think it's an issue.

Add a comment



(never displayed)



 
1000
What is the opposite word of small?
Notify me of new comments via email.
Remember my form inputs on this computer.

Top Three Causes of Project Failure

Businessman in a black suit holding up a white sign reading failed

The top three causes of project failure, which if addressed will greatly increase the chances of project success.

Coming to Terms With the Finish Date

Colourful calendar pages

Every project has a finish date. This article looks at how the finish date for a project is derived and how a project team comes to terms with that date.

Resourcing Project Managers

Project manager jobs advert in a newspaper

Ironically, although resourcing production team members is a significant part of a Project Manager's role, very little focus is placed on resourcing the Project Managers themselves.

Learning from Project Failures

Success and failure directional signs

Some of the most important lessons we learn come from failures. Kenneth Darter explains a simple four step process to make sure the same failures aren't repeated.

PROJECT SMART is the project management resource that helps managers at all levels improve their performance. We provide an important knowledge base for those involved in managing projects of all kinds. With weekly exclusive updates, we keep you in touch with the latest project management thinking.

WE ARE CONNECTED ~ Follow us on social media to get regular updates on what's happening in the world of project management.


Latest Comments

Mel commented on…
Successful Project Management: Eight Simple Steps to Follow
- Thu 27 August 3:39am

John Reiling commented on…
Seeing the Project Through to the End
- Mon 24 August 6:07pm

Duncan Haughey commented on…
Protecting Sensitive Project Information
- Thu 20 August 2:57pm

Latest tweets

General Project Management • How to Engage Your Team Members https://t.co/jZzzwDmMRa #pm #projectsmart about 10 hours ago

Balancing Out the Fun Projects http://t.co/1FFqbJN2Rb #pmot #projectsmart about 1 day ago

General Project Management • Some Quick Questions about Motivation! https://t.co/bNDQAhvKMk #pm #projectsmart about 1 day ago