servicenow original assignment group

• Stack Overflow for Teams Where developers & technologists share private knowledge with coworkers
• Advertising & Talent Reach devs & technologists worldwide about your product, service or employer brand
• OverflowAI GenAI features for Teams
• OverflowAPI Train & fine-tune LLMs
• Labs The future of collective knowledge sharing
• About the company Visit the blog

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most.

Q&A for work

Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search.

Get early access and see previews of new features.

Assigning the fulfillment group based on user's location using assignment lookup rules in catalog task advance script

I created a script in catalog task in workflow to find the location of the current user and find which assignment lookup rule should be use base on the location. But it's not working.

Appreciate all the help. Thank you.

2 Answers 2

Judging by the table name that looks like a data lookup table. Is there any reason why you are not trying to implement this requirement using the Data Lookup Definitions rather than Assignment Rules?

If you are insistent on taking this route, then the last line should read

as that would be a Sys ID and not the display value of the location. The script would be running on the current task record, so it's accessed using current . Also, take steps to verify that the field name is indeed task_fulfillment_group .

Adding on to the given answer, please add the following at the last line of your code, provided that task is also a GlideRecord.

Your Answer

Reminder: Answers generated by artificial intelligence tools are not allowed on Stack Overflow. Learn more

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest.

Required, but never shown

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy .

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged servicenow or ask your own question .

• Featured on Meta
• Announcing a change to the data-dump process
• We've made changes to our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy - July 2024

Hot Network Questions

• Does a simple and intuitive theory have better chances of being true?
• How will a very short undergrad impact PhD applications?
• Can multi-threading improve performance of an IO-bound process?
• The relevance of knowing "just facts"
• Downloading administrative boundaries from OpenHistoricalMap
• Thomson's lamp: a useless paradox?
• Any idea what game this picture is from?
• DC motor pump always transports in same direction, regardless of polarity
• Why is it inadvisable to apologise for a car accident?
• Had there ever been a self-ejecting FDR/CDR?
• Child's teddies "being mean" after dark
• How to reinstall a ceiling fan that fell out of ceiling?
• Why isn’t this formula used at all?
• Is my EV subpanel properly wired?
• Did the Romans have anything artificial? Which words did they use to describe it?
• How do Trinitarians distinguish whether the Hebrew bible is referring to the "being" or "person[s]" of God in the verses that declare oneness?
• What exactly is code and how does it relate to law? Where does it fit into the hierarchy of law?
• Can I restrict which users can `sendmail` from an address with Postfix?
• Does the throttling profile data for any STS missions exist?
• Accessing an overridden Greek letter
• Excessive chain wear
• How do I know when I have sufficiently mastered a right hand speed drill for accordion?
• How to Respond to Directive: "Move Our Entire Website to a CMS Service"
• Is it safe to keep an outdated credit card?

Your browser or one of your plugins is not allowing JavaScript to be run. This is a bummer since the ServiceNow Developers Site is dynamic and depends on JavaScript to function. If you want to visit this site, please disable the plugin, activate this site for JavaScript or use another browser.

ServiceNow Advanced Reference Qualifier | How to filter the Assignment group based on Assigned To

Been in a predicament in ServiceNow, where you know the person a task needs to be assigned to, but don’t know the right group? I got you!

In this video, we add an advanced reference qualifier on a dictionary override on the assignment group fields (for incidents) that calls a server side script include to run some funky glideRecord queries and return as back a refined list of group sys_id’s. Its then these groups that are shown when you click the Assignment Group magnifying glass.

https://docs.servicenow.com/en-US/bundle/tokyo-platform-administration/page/script/server-scripting/concept/c_ReferenceQualifiers.html

https://www.servicenow.com/community/developer-forum/dynamic-advanced-reference-qualifier-examples/m-p/1386576

Reference Qualifier bit:

javascript:new global.AssignmentGroupFilter().refineAssignmentGroup(current.assigned_to)

Script Include:

Tags: advanced reference qualifier beth anglin GlideRecord reference field reference qualifier script include servicenerd servicenow admin servicenow demo servicenow tutorial sysid in

You may also like...

How to create a Variable Set

ServiceNow San Diego Flow Diagramming | Flow Designer stuff #Shorts

ServiceNow: How to embed hyperlinks in work notes | clickable links

• Next story Flow Designer Error Handling ServiceNow | How to…
• Previous story ServiceNow GlideAggregate Count | Is it better than GlideRecord getRowCount()

All Videos / New Features / Tips & Tricks

AI in ServiceNow with Justin Meadows | What does it mean?

February 27, 2023

New Features / Tips & Tricks

What is ChatGPT and Can We Use it for ServiceNow

December 18, 2022

• Recent Posts
• Popular Posts
• Recent Comments

ServiceNow Process Automation Designer (PAD) | What does it do?

December 19, 2023

All Videos / Flow Designer

“Do the Following Until” Flow Logic in ServiceNow Flow Designer

September 1, 2023

Exploring Dynamic Flow and Get Flow Output Logic in ServiceNow Flow Designer!

July 24, 2023

All Videos / Flow Designer / Tips & Tricks

Flow Designer Error Handling ServiceNow | How to…

July 3, 2023

June 11, 2023

Service Catalog / Tips & Tricks

October 30, 2022

Integrations

ServiceNow Inbound REST API | Import Set API

September 12, 2022

New Features / Shorts

ServiceNow San Diego Polaris | ServiceNow Next Experience UI #SanDiego #Polaris #Shorts

February 7, 2022

Flow Designer

ServiceNow Flow Template Builder | Create a template using Flow Template Builder

October 6, 2022

• artificial intelligence business rule client script flow Flow designer Flow designer development flow designer for service catalog flow designer servicenow flow designer servicenow orlando flow designer servicenow training flow design tutorial g form glideajax GlideRecord integration hub onload script include service catalog service catalog in servicenow service catalogue servicenerd servicenow servicenow admin servicenow administrator training servicenow community servicenow demo servicenow developer servicenow developer training servicenow flow servicenow flow designer servicenow flow designer approval servicenow flow logic servicenow glideajax example ServiceNow how to servicenow integration servicenow microsoft teams servicenow new features ServiceNow Next Experience ServiceNow Polaris servicenow reference field ServiceNow San Diego servicenow shorts servicenow training servicenow tutorial subflow

Learning ServiceNow by Tim Woodruff

Get full access to Learning ServiceNow and 60K+ other titles, with a free 10-day trial of O'Reilly.

There are also live events, courses curated by job role, and more.

Assigned to and Assignment group

The Assigned to [assigned_to] field is a reference  field type that points to the Users [sys_user] table. This field is generally used to designate a user to work on, or be responsible for the task. By default, this field has a reference qualifier (role=itil) set on its dictionary record that prevents any non-itil user from being assigned to a task. You can override this reference qualifier on tables that extend task though, as the Project Task and Service Order tables do, if you have the relevant plugins installed.

The Assignment group [assignment_group] field serves pretty much the same purpose. The reason for having both, is that a workflow might automatically assign a certain type of task ticket to a group, ...

Get Learning ServiceNow now with the O’Reilly learning platform.

O’Reilly members experience books, live events, courses curated by job role, and more from O’Reilly and nearly 200 top publishers.

Don’t leave empty-handed

Get Mark Richards’s Software Architecture Patterns ebook to better understand how to design components—and how they should interact.

It’s yours, free.

Check it out now on O’Reilly

Dive in for free with a 10-day trial of the O’Reilly learning platform—then explore all the other resources our members count on to build skills and solve problems every day.

MOSCOW - RUSSIA

Vinlund international group.

Staropetrovsky Proezd 7A, Building 25, Entrance 5, 4th Floor, 125130 Moscow, Russia

• Phone: +7 495 283-00-14
• Fax: +7 503 232-26-79
• email: [email protected]
• web: www.vinlund.ru

Company Profile

• LIST WITH US

To: VINLUND INTERNATIONAL GROUP

Enter the security code:

+7 503 232-26-79

+7 495 283-00-14

Directory of Freight Forwarders, Cargo Agents, Shipping Companies, Air, Ocean, Land, Logistics and Transportation Brokers

Get the Reddit app

Subreddit for ServiceNow users, admins, devs, platform owners, CTOs and everything in between.

Report for My Team for reassignments

ServiceNow recently replaced Remedy at a large decentralized organization. Many groups have their own IT assignment groups so tickets are passed to different assignment groups. Lots of requests for reports that include tickets that passed through "my" assignment group. Filtering the log we can easily see the times ticket was reassigned and even the duration but I can't figure out how to run a report that lists tickets and information such as duration before it was passed to my group. It looks like I can use incident_metric to get at the info I want but I can't figure out how to put it in a useful report form. Any help is greatly appreciated!

By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .

Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app

You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.

Enter a 6-digit backup code

Create your username and password.

Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.

Reset your password

Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password

Check your inbox

An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account

Choose a Reddit account to continue

Watch CBS News

U.S., Russia prisoner swap secures release of Evan Gershkovich, Paul Whelan and others

By Arden Farhi , Olivia Gazis , Camilla Schick

Updated on: August 1, 2024 / 4:38 PM EDT / CBS News

After a historically complex, monthslong negotiation involving more than six countries and two dozen prisoners, the Biden administration on Thursday announced it had secured the release of three American citizens from Russia, including Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich , Marine veteran Paul Whelan  and Russian-American radio journalist Alsu Kurmasheva , all of whom are expected to arrive on American soil by nightfall. 

The three will return to the United States as part of a 24-person prisoner swap — one of the largest since the end of the Cold War — among the U.S., Russia, Germany and three other Western countries. 

The deal is a significant and hard-fought win for the Biden administration, which has secured the release of more than 60 hostages or wrongful detainees from around the world over the past three years. Few cases have received a similar level of prominence or scrutiny as the ones in Russia, a longstanding geopolitical rival of the U.S. with a history of taking — and trading — foreign detainees. 

"All have endured unimaginable suffering and uncertainty. Today, their agony is over," President Biden said in a statement.  

Under the terms of the agreement, 12 political dissidents held in Russia have been released to Germany. Kremlin critic and Washington Post contributor Vladimir Kara-Murza is expected to be flown to Germany, national security adviser Jake Sullivan said Thursday. Kara-Murza is a British-Russian citizen and a green card holder. His family lives in the U.S.

In return, Russia will receive eight of its nationals, including three that were being held in U.S. prisons: Vadim Konoshchenok, Vladislav Klyushin and Roman Seleznyov.

Two Russians held in Slovenia, one in Poland and another in Norway are also headed home. All have known or suspected ties to Russian intelligence, according to U.S. officials. They included a husband and wife, Artem Viktorovich Dultsev and Anna Valerevna Dultseva, who were arrested in 2022 and convicted on espionage charges in Slovenia. They were each serving a 19-month sentence. They flew back to Russia with their two children.

Key among the prisoners returned to Russia, according to American officials familiar with the talks, was Vadim Krasikov, a convicted murderer who was sentenced to life in prison by a German court in 2021 for killing a Georgian asylee who had fought against Russians in Chechnya. German judges said the killing had been ordered by Russian federal authorities and called it "state terrorism."

Details of the deal, which was coordinated over more than half a year by multiple U.S. government agencies including the White House, State Department and Central Intelligence Agency, were closely held, though speculation about the swap had mounted in recent days after prominent Russian political prisoners, including Kara-Murza, were moved from their respective jails in Russia. 

The painstakingly choreographed exchange, apparently one of the most complex in history, finally took place on Thursday on a tarmac in Ankara, Turkey.

After enduring unimaginable suffering and uncertainty, the Americans detained in Russia are safe, free, and have begun their journeys back into the arms of their families. pic.twitter.com/1rYNBTt9tJ — President Biden (@POTUS) August 1, 2024

Russia imprisons Americans

Gershkovich, the Wall Street Journal reporter, was taken into Russian custody while on assignment in Yekaterinburg in March of 2023. Russian authorities charged him with espionage, drawing immediate condemnation from the U.S. government, which in April of that year officially determined Gershkovich to be wrongfully detained.

Over a year later, in early July 2024, Gershkovich was sentenced to 16 years in prison by a Russian court. The U.S. called his hurried trial "a sham."

Gershkovich's family said in a statement Thursday, "We have waited 491 days for Evan's release, and it's hard to describe what today feels like. We can't wait to give him the biggest hug."

Wall Street Journal publisher Almar Latour and editor in chief Emma Tucker said, "We are overwhelmed with relief and elated for Evan and his family, as well as for the others who were released. At the same time, we condemn in the strongest terms Vladimir Putin's regime in Russia, which orchestrated Evan's 491-day wrongful imprisonment based on sham accusations."

Whelan, a Marine veteran and the longest-held American detainee in Russia, was arrested in December 2018 when he traveled to the country to attend a friend's wedding. He was also charged with espionage and sentenced to 16 years in prison in 2020. 

Whelan, his family and the U.S. government consistently denied the espionage allegations against him and said he was being used as a political pawn. The U.S. government also declared him wrongfully detained.

"Paul was held hostage for 2,043 days. His case was that of an American in peril, held by the Russian Federation as part of their blighted initiative to use humans as pawns to extract concessions," the Whelan family wrote in a statement Thursday. "Paul Whelan is free."

Kurmasheva, a journalist based in Prague for the U.S-funded Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) who holds dual Russian and American citizenship, was detained in June of 2023, after visiting her mother in May. Russian authorities charged her with disseminating false information about Russia's military before sentencing her to six and a half years in prison in a hurried, secret trial in July of this year.  

Pavel Butorin, Kurmasheva's husband, said Thursday, "After over a year of separation and more than nine months of brutal detention, Alsu will finally be free. Thanks to the unwavering efforts of the U.S. government and our tireless advocacy work, she will soon reunite with her family."

Unlike Whelan and Gershkovich, Kurmasheva was not officially deemed wrongfully detained by the U.S., but Mr. Biden publicly called for her release at the White House Correspondents' Dinner in April 2024. 

Not all Americans currently imprisoned in Russia were involved in the swap. American teacher Marc Fogel , musician Michael Travis Leake , U.S. Army staff sergeant Gordon Black , and Russian-American ballerina Ksenia Karelina  remain imprisoned, among others.

Negotiating the deal

Soon after American WNBA star Brittney Griner was released in exchange for convicted arms dealer Viktor Bout in December of 2022, Secretary of State Antony Blinken directed teams at the State Department to make an offer for Whelan, which the Russians rejected at the time. 

In the months that followed, at the urging of national security advisor Jake Sullivan, U.S. negotiators raised Krasikov with German interlocutors as part of a burgeoning new proposal to Russia, but made little headway. Russia had long sought the repatriation of Krasikov, a convicted murderer with ties to Russian intelligence.

But the Germans were reluctant to let Krasikov out. 

"He was certainly the biggest fish the Russians wanted back," a senior U.S. official said about Krasikov. "This is a bad dude and a member of the Russian intelligence service."

Blinken then began internal discussions at the State Department on the idea of enlarging the deal with someone Germany and other Western nations wanted freed: Alexey Navalny . 

Then things got even more complicated.

The White House found out that Gershkovich had been detained on March 29, 2023, when the Wall Street Journal, Gershkovich's employer, notified a senior official on the National Security Council. It soon became clear that the U.S. would be negotiating for the release of another American in Russian custody. 

Just days after Gershkovich's detention, Blinken called his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, and highlighted that Gershkovich is a journalist working for a respected international news outlet, that claims of him being a spy were outrageous and false, that Moscow had "crossed the line" and that the matter should be solved diplomatically. Lavrov responded that Gershkovich had been "caught red-handed" and that "him being a journalist does not provide him immunity." To which Blinken replied: "You know our country well. You know our system well. You know that for all our efforts to learn information, we do not use journalists." 

Blinken moved to raise the idea of Navalny being part of a deal with German Foreign Minister Baerbock at the G7 foreign ministers' meeting in Karuizawa, Nagano, Japan, on April 17, 2023. The secretary then took it higher, to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who agreed to the idea after further conversations.

Talks then moved to intelligence channels — the CIA talking to its Russian counterparts about spies. U.S. officials were initially reluctant to communicate via intelligence channels because they did not want to lend credence to false Russian accusations that Gershkovich was engaged in espionage.  

Yet negotiators realized it might be the only way to clinch the Americans' freedom. 

Over the summer and into 2024, it became apparent that any deal would have to be broadened in order to entice the Russians and have to include Krasikov, the Russian held in Germany on murder charges. American officials began putting out feelers with allied countries that were holding prisoners deemed to be of potential interest to the Kremlin — among them suspected Russian spies jailed in Poland, Slovenia and Norway. The U.S. also approached Kuwait and Brazil but those efforts did not pan out.

All the while, national security adviser Jake Sullivan spoke regularly with German officials, hoping to convince them to part with Krasikov.

A breakthrough finally appeared imminent in early February when Mr. Biden met with Scholz in the Oval Office. The two leaders discussed options for a potential offer to Russia that would have included Krasikov, Whelan, Gershkovich and Alexey Navalny, a prominent Russian opposition voice. 

"For you, I will do this," the German chancellor told Mr. Biden, according to a senior administration official familiar with the private meeting.

Seven days later though, Navalny died under mysterious circumstances in a Russian prison. The would-be offer collapsed before it was even presented to Moscow, U.S. officials said.

That same day, Sullivan met with Gershkovich's parents and told them there could still be a path to a deal. 

Vice President Kamala Harris huddled privately at the Munich Security Conference with Chancellor Schloz of Germany to stress the importance of releasing Krasikov, a White House official said. Harris also conferred with Robert Golob, the prime minister of Slovenia, which was holding two Russian prisoners who the U.S. had identified as being of high priority to the Russians. 

Also at the Munich Security Conference, Blinken scrambled to bring Navalny's newly widowed wife, Yulia, in through the security cordons for an emotional meeting with U.S. officials just ahead of her impactful speech at the conference. 

The U.S. would let a month or so pass before re-engaging the Germans with a new proposal that added to the deal Navalny's associates and other political prisoners held in Russia.

In April, Mr. Biden sent a letter to Scholz, detailing the plan. Scholz signed off weeks later.

Meetings ensued between senior U.S. and Russian intelligence officials in a third country, according to officials. In early July, CIA director Burns presented his Russian negotiating partners the framework of a deal. A formal proposal came in mid-July. 

The deal that was formulated by the White House, blessed by the Germans and communicated via the CIA was now in Russian hands.

The answer from Moscow? 

We have a deal.

At around 12:45 p.m. on Sunday, July 21, the president phoned his Slovenian counterpart to finalize last-minute details of the exchange. Mr. Biden was at this Rehoboth Beach vacation home, beset by COVID .

An hour later, knowing that a signature accomplishment of his presidency was within his grasp, he announced that he would not be seeking reelection .

Weijia Jiang , Pat Milton and Tucker Reals contributed to this report.

• Biden Administration
• Paul Whelan
• Evan Gershkovich
• Alexey Navalny
• Alsu Kurmasheva

Arden Farhi is the senior White House producer at CBS News. He has covered several presidential campaigns and the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations. He also produces "The Takeout with Major Garrett."

More from CBS News

Biden hails deal freeing Americans from Russia: "Their brutal ordeal is over"

U.S., Russia prisoner swap is the latest in a long history of exchanges

Suspect in woman's Boston murder ordered extradited to U.S. from Kenya

Russia's Wagner group admits losses in Mali as gruesome videos surface

• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Pinterest
• Share through Email

What Is The MoSCoW Method And How Does It Work In Product Management?

Hannah Clark is the Editor of The Product Manager. Following six years of experience in the tech industry, she pivoted into the content marketing space. She’s spent the better part of the past decade working in marketing agencies and offering freelance branding and content development services. Today, she’s a digital publisher who is privileged to work with some of the most brilliant voices in the product world. Driven by insatiable curiosity and a love of bringing people together, her mission is to foster a fun, vibrant, and inspiring community of product people.

No, it has nothing to do with Russia. This popular feature prioritization method is a great way to figure out what you should (and shouldn't) tackle next on your product roadmap.

As a product manager, you know the importance of an effective prioritization technique when you’re deciding on what to work on first. The MoSCoW prioritization method is a linchpin in agile project management that can help you sort through your to-do list and make informed decisions.

What is the MoSCoW Prioritization Method?

The MoSCoW method guides decision-making in project management by putting your tasks into four prioritization categories: 

• Should have

The MoSCoW prioritization method is essential for product managers in agile environments , where flexibility and adaptability are key. I recommend pairing this framework with a product management tool like Mira that allows for visualization and collaboration.

Must Have: Non-Negotiable Essentials

'Must-haves' are the non-negotiable, essential functionalities that your new product or software development project can't do without. They are your deal-breakers, the backbone of your product features, and the foundation of your product release.

Should Have: High-Impact, Manageable Effort

The 'Should have' category is crucial for a balanced approach in agile project management. These are important product features or functionalities that provide significant value but aren't deal-breakers. They enhance the user experience and are often seen as the 'nice to have' elements that don’t cause scope creep.

Stay in-the-know on all things product management including trends, how-tos, and insights - delivered right to your inbox.

• Your email *
• By submitting this form, you agree to receive our newsletter and occasional emails related to The Product Manager. You can unsubscribe at any time. For more details, please review our Privacy Policy . We're protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
• Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Could Have: Nice Extras When You Have Enough Time

'Could haves' are the cherry on top of your project delivery. These features would be great to include if you have enough time and resources. They are often included in the backlog for future release considerations.

Won’t Have: Not This Time Around

The 'Won’t have' category is just as important in your MoSCoW analysis. These features or initiatives won’t be part of the current iteration or product release. They are often set aside for subsequent phases or iterations of the product development cycle.

Where Does The Term MoSCoW Come From?

The term MoSCoW method is not related to the Russian capital. It's an acronym crafted by Dai Clegg during his time at Oracle . The method was later popularized through the Dynamic Systems Development Method (DSDM) methodology.

When To Use The MoSCoW Prioritization Method

The MoSCoW method is adaptable and can be used across various projects and industries. It’s especially effective in agile project management, where the workflow is iterative, and priorities can shift. Here are some scenarios where the MoSCoW method shines:

• When managing a tight timeframe with limited resources.
• In product development, where clear categorization of product features is essential.
• For managing a backlog effectively in software development.
• To create a clear roadmap and prevent scope creep.
• When balancing the needs of key stakeholders and team members.

Pros and Cons of the MoSCoW Method

• Enhanced Communication : It facilitates clear communication among team members and stakeholders.
• Flexibility : Ideal for agile environments where priorities can shift.
• Focus on MVP : Helps in defining the minimum viable product effectively.
• Possible Neglect of Lower Priorities : 'Could haves' and 'Won’t haves' might be perpetually postponed.
• Subjectivity in Categorization : Sometimes, there can be disagreements among stakeholders and team members on the categorization of tasks.

More Articles

The okr roadmap: what it is & how to use it, product strategy: what it is, and how to nail it, the top 10 ux design trends of 2024, examples of how the moscow prioritization method is used, in software development:.

• ' Must haves ' might include critical functionalities like user authentication and data security. 
• ' Should haves ' could involve advanced user stories that improve the user interface.
• ' Could haves ' might include additional integrations with third-party services. 
• ' Won’t haves ' might encompass experimental features that are slated for a future release.

In Launching a New Product:

• ' Must haves ' would be the features that define the product’s unique selling proposition. 
• ' Should haves ' might include additional services that enhance customer satisfaction.
• ' Could haves ' could be innovative features that aren’t essential for the initial launch. 
• ' Won’t haves ' are those features that are deferred to avoid scope creep.

In summary, the MoSCoW method is a strategic approach to decision-making in product management. This prioritization technique ensures you have a clear roadmap, with each initiative thoughtfully categorized. By applying the MoSCoW rules, product managers and development teams can navigate through the complexities of project delivery, ensuring that each iteration, each product release, delivers maximum value on time. So, embrace the MoSCoW prioritization method, and watch your projects transform into a streamlined agile workflow.

Don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter for more product management resources and guides , plus the latest podcasts, interviews, and other insights from industry leaders and experts.

• 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

Talk to an expert.

Schedule a few minutes with us to share more about your product roadmapping goals and we'll tailor a demo to show you how easy it is to build strategic roadmaps, align behind customer needs, prioritize, and measure success.

Share on Mastodon