Impact Effort Matrix 🧮 Prompts

Purpose: Help product teams prioritise design ideas and features based on impact and effort for maximum user value and delivery efficiency

Design Thinking Phase: Ideate

Time: 45–60 min session + 1–2 hours analysis

Difficulty: ⭐⭐

When to use:When you have a list of competing design opportunities or featuresWhile preparing a product roadmap or MVP scopeTo align stakeholders on what to tackle first in a cross-functional context

What it is

The Impact–Effort Matrix is a collaborative tool used to evaluate and prioritise initiatives based on their potential impact to users or business and the effort (time, cost, complexity) required to implement them. By plotting ideas on a 2×2 matrix, teams get a clear visual map of what to do now, later, or potentially park entirely.

📺 Video by NNgroup. Embedded for educational reference.

Why it matters

Design and product teams often generate many ideas—features, enhancements, or UX solutions—following discovery or ideation sessions. But not all ideas are equal in value or feasibility. The matrix helps teams apply strategic filters and make decisions objectively. It supports stakeholder alignment, prevents analysis paralysis, and speeds up go-to-market decisions by focusing on high-impact, low-effort options first.

When to use

• After ideation workshops to vet a backlog of UX opportunities
• During sprint planning to choose initiatives that deliver quick wins
• To evaluate legacy features for pruning or rework

Benefits

• Rich Insights: Helps uncover user needs that aren’t visible in metrics.
• Flexibility: Works across various project types and timelines.
• User Empathy: Deepens understanding of behaviours and motivations.

How to use it

• List all the candidate ideas, features, or UX improvements you want to evaluate.
• Define ‘impact’ in your context—this could be user satisfaction, engagement, business outcome, etc.
• Do the same for ‘effort’—consider tech lift, design complexity, risk, and dependencies.
• Plot each item on a 2x2 grid: High vs Low Impact on one axis, Low vs High Effort on the other.
• Segment your options into four categories: ‘Quick Wins’ (High Impact, Low Effort), ‘Major Projects’ (High Impact, High Effort), ‘Fill-ins’ (Low Impact, Low Effort), and ‘Deprioritise’ (Low Impact, High Effort).
• Discuss points of disagreement openly and calibrate based on user needs and product goals.
• Document final placements and decisions for later reference and stakeholder visibility.

Example Output

Quick Wins: Streamlined onboarding flow, typography hierarchy update

Major Projects: Mobile offline access, re-architecting profile management

Fill-ins: Footer microcopy fix, button size tweak for one device

Deprioritise: Feature to export user data in XML format (unused, complex)

Common Pitfalls

• Misaligned Definitions: Teams often have fuzzy or differing definitions of 'effort' or 'impact'. Get clear on both—before plotting.
• Bias Toward the Familiar: Ideas from senior voices or past success get unfair elevation. Make sure all ideas are assessed equally.
• Too Theoretical: The matrix is a decision aid, not gospel. Validate your scoring with user data or tech feasibility checks.

10 Design-Ready AI Prompts for Impact Effort Matrix – UX/UI Edition

How These Prompts Work (C.S.I.R. Framework)

Each of the templates below follows the C.S.I.R. method — a proven structure for writing clear, effective prompts that get better results from ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, or any other LLM.

C.S.I.R. stands for:

• Context: Who you are and the UX situation you're working in
• Specific Info: Key design inputs, tasks, or constraints the AI should consider
• Intent: What you want the AI to help you achieve
• Response Format: The structure or format you want the AI to return (e.g. checklist, table, journey map)

Level up your career with smarter AI prompts.Get templates used by UX leaders — no guesswork, just results.Design faster, research smarter, and ship with confidence.First one’s free. Unlock all 10 by becoming a member.

Prompt Template 1: “Map Features onto Impact–Effort Quadrants”

Map Features onto Impact–Effort Quadrants

Context: You are a product designer facilitating prioritisation for a cross-functional team.  
Specific Info: You have a list of [15 features or UX improvements] from a recent discovery workshop. Criteria for impact include [user value, retention, NPS]; effort includes [engineering complexity and design scope].  
Intent: Sort features into four impact–effort quadrants.  
Response Format: Return a table with columns: Feature, Impact Score (1–5), Effort Score (1–5), Suggested Quadrant.

Ask questions if scoring criteria are unclear, or if definitions of "impact" or "effort" need refining. Suggest a way to visualise or present the matrix to stakeholders.

Prompt Template 2: “Red-Flag High-Effort/Low-Impact Work”

Red-Flag High-Effort/Low-Impact Work

Context: You are a UX lead reviewing backlog grooming notes for an upcoming sprint.  
Specific Info: The backlog includes [UX debt items, feature ideas, and stakeholder suggestions]. Project constraints include [limited front-end capacity] and a delivery deadline of [X weeks].  
Intent: Identify features that should be deprioritised due to high effort and low user or business impact.  
Response Format: Return a prioritisation report listing Red-Flag items with rationale, suggested action (defer, discard, reframe), and a high-level impact–effort comment.

Ask if additional context like user feedback or analytics is needed to validate deprioritisation.

Prompt Template 3: “Turn Research Insights Into Prioritisable UX Actions”

Turn Research Insights Into Prioritisable UX Actions

Context: You're a UX researcher summarising recent usability testing and interview findings.  
Specific Info: The findings include [5 recurring pain points and 3 user-requested features]. Team is planning next quarter’s roadmap.  
Intent: Translate qualitative insights into clear UX opportunities evaluated by impact–effort.  
Response Format: Provide a bullet list: Finding → UX Action → Expected Impact → Estimated Effort.

If gaps exist between research findings and actionable items, propose follow-ups for validation.

Prompt Template 4: “Facilitate a Prioritisation Workshop Agenda”

Facilitate a Prioritisation Workshop Agenda

Context: You are organising a remote UX prioritisation workshop with distributed stakeholders.  
Specific Info: Attendees include [Design, Product, Engineering, Marketing]. You have [20 items] for review. Tools: [FigJam, Zoom, Miro].  
Intent: Design a structured 60-minute session to align on impact and effort scoring collaboratively.  
Response Format: Return a time-boxed agenda, key exercises (with tool suggestions), and pre/post-workshop follow-ups.

Flag potential alignment risks or stakeholder pushback, and suggest facilitators to mitigate.

Prompt Template 5: “Reframe Technical Constraints as Low-Effort Wins”

Reframe Technical Constraints as Low-Effort Wins

Context: You’re a UX designer reviewing constraints flagged by engineers as blockers.  
Specific Info: The team rejected [3 design ideas] due to backend limitations and asked for alternatives. Time is limited before release.  
Intent: Propose alternative solutions with similar user impact but significantly lower technical implementation effort.  
Response Format: For each blocked idea, propose a workaround or alternative, describe trade-offs, and estimate feasibility.

Ask for clarification on specific API or backend constraints if needed.

Prompt Template 6: “Capture Stakeholder Prioritisation Rationale”

Capture Stakeholder Prioritisation Rationale

Context: You’re running stakeholder interviews post-roadmap planning.  
Specific Info: Some high-effort initiatives were approved over low-effort quick wins. Stakeholders explained their reasoning verbally during planning.  
Intent: Extract and summarise rationale to document prioritisation logic.  
Response Format: Bullet points with stakeholder, reasoning, associated item, and quadrant alignment (if any).

Note any logic gaps, conflicting motivations, or areas that need followed-up clarification.

Prompt Template 7: “Build Out a UX Debt Impact Matrix”

Build Out a UX Debt Impact Matrix

Context: You’re formalising a UX debt backlog for triage.  
Specific Info: The backlog includes accessibility issues, inconsistent UI, and outdated interaction patterns. Data includes [user complaints, support tickets].  
Intent: Visualise UX debt using an impact–effort lens to aid triage.  
Response Format: Return a table listing issue, affected flow, customer pain evidence, estimated user impact, and effort to resolve.

Ask if design tokens, design system constraints, or mobile parity affect resolution scope.

Prompt Template 8: “Draft Executive Summary of Prioritisation Outcomes”

Draft Executive Summary of Prioritisation Outcomes

Context: You’re a Design Manager communicating outcomes from design-team prioritisation to senior leadership.  
Specific Info: The team evaluated [25 backlog ideas] and selected [8 for roadmap inclusion].  
Intent: Compose a crisp summary that highlights rationale, value alignment, and expected delivery effort.  
Response Format: Return a 3-paragraph briefing suitable for slides or email. Include visual matrix if applicable.

Ask if any cross-functional decisions or supporting data should be referenced.

Prompt Template 9: “Simulate Impact–Effort Scoring for Hypothetical Features”

Simulate Impact–Effort Scoring for Hypothetical Features

Context: You’re preparing a UX case study or product concept validation.  
Specific Info: You have a fictional product idea with [6 proposed features]. You want to simulate how they might rank.  
Intent: Create a fictional but logically modelled matrix for storytelling purposes.  
Response Format: Provide a quadrant visual-style summary and supporting rationale for each feature’s placement.

Make assumptions transparent. Invite critique or iteration ideas.

Prompt Template 10: “Identify Fast Follower Features After MVP Launch”

Identify Fast Follower Features After MVP Launch

Context: You’re post-launch with an MVP, now planning version 1.1 enhancements.  
Specific Info: Feedback shows [X positive engagements, Y user gaps]. Time-to-ship must remain low.  
Intent: Suggest features that require low build time but add measurable user experience value.  
Response Format: Return a shortlist with feature, estimated build effort, expected impact, and which user need it addresses.

Ask how performance or usage data might refine prioritisation further.

Recommended Tools

• Miro or MURAL – For collaborative prioritisation grids in workshops
• Trello, Jira, or Notion – To action priority labels or tags linked to outcomes
• Parabol – Async Sprint Retros with prioritisation modules
• Whimsical – Great for quick matrix templates with real-time inputs

Learn More

• NNGroup: UX Research & Design Articles
• Interaction Design Foundation – Topics
• Google Design Sprint Kit