13 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| portfolio-roadmapping-bets | Use when managing multiple initiatives across time horizons (now/next/later, H1/H2/H3), balancing risk vs return across portfolio, sizing and sequencing bets with dependencies, setting exit/scale criteria for experiments, allocating resources across innovation types (core/adjacent/transformational), or when user mentions portfolio planning, roadmap horizons, betting framework, initiative prioritization, innovation portfolio, or resource allocation across horizons. |
Portfolio Roadmapping Bets
Table of Contents
Purpose
Create strategic portfolio roadmaps that balance exploration vs exploitation, size bets by effort and impact, sequence initiatives across time horizons, and set clear exit/scale criteria for disciplined resource allocation.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
Portfolio Context
- Managing 5+ initiatives requiring sequencing and trade-offs
- Balancing quick wins vs strategic bets vs R&D exploration
- Allocating scarce resources (budget, people, time) across competing priorities
- Planning across multiple time horizons (H1: 0-6mo, H2: 6-12mo, H3: 12-24mo+)
Decision Complexity
- Initiatives have dependencies requiring careful sequencing
- Exit criteria needed to kill or scale experiments
- Risk/return profiles vary widely (low-risk incremental vs high-risk transformational)
- Portfolio balance matters (70% core, 20% adjacent, 10% transformational)
Stakeholder Communication
- Executives need portfolio-level view of roadmap with strategic rationale
- Teams need clarity on what's now vs next vs later
- Investors or board want visibility into innovation pipeline and resource allocation
Do NOT use when:
- Single initiative with clear priority (use one-pager-prd or project-risk-register instead)
- Purely operational prioritization without strategic horizons (use prioritization-effort-impact)
- No resource constraints or trade-offs (just do everything)
What Is It?
Portfolio Roadmapping Bets is a framework for managing a portfolio of initiatives across time horizons using betting language to:
- Size bets: Estimate effort (S/M/L) and impact (1x/3x/10x potential)
- Sequence bets: Order initiatives based on dependencies, learning, and strategic timing
- Set bet criteria: Define what success looks like (scale) and when to exit (kill)
- Balance portfolio: Ensure healthy mix across risk profiles and horizons
- Review bets: Periodic check-ins to kill losers, double-down on winners
Quick Example:
Theme: Grow marketplace revenue 3x in 18 months
H1 Bets (Now, 0-6 months):
- Bet 1: Improve search relevance (Medium effort, 1.5x GMV) - Scale if CTR +20%
- Bet 2: Add "Buy It Now" pricing (Small, 1.3x GMV) - Exit if <5% adoption in 60 days
H2 Bets (Next, 6-12 months):
- Bet 3: Launch seller analytics dashboard (Large, 1.8x GMV) - Depends on Bet 1 data pipeline
- Bet 4: Experiment with auction format (Medium, 3x potential) - Exit if fraud risk >2%
H3 Bets (Later, 12-24 months):
- Bet 5: Build AI recommendation engine (X-Large, 10x potential) - Depends on Bets 1+3 data
Portfolio Balance: 60% core (Bets 1-2), 30% adjacent (Bets 3-4), 10% transformational (Bet 5)
Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
Portfolio Roadmapping Bets Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Define portfolio theme and constraints
- [ ] Step 2: Inventory and size all bets
- [ ] Step 3: Sequence bets across horizons
- [ ] Step 4: Set exit and scale criteria
- [ ] Step 5: Balance and validate portfolio
Step 1: Define portfolio theme and constraints
Clarify the strategic theme (north star), time horizons (H1/H2/H3 definitions), resource constraints (budget, people, time), and portfolio balance targets (e.g., 70/20/10 rule). See Portfolio Theme & Constraints for guidance.
Step 2: Inventory and size all bets
List all candidate initiatives, size each by effort (S/M/L/XL) and impact potential (1x/3x/10x), categorize by type (core/adjacent/transformational), and identify dependencies. For simple cases use resources/template.md. For complex cases with 15+ bets or multiple themes, study resources/methodology.md.
Step 3: Sequence bets across horizons
Assign each bet to H1 (now), H2 (next), or H3 (later) based on dependencies, strategic timing, learning sequencing, and capacity constraints. See Sequencing & Dependencies for sequencing heuristics.
Step 4: Set exit and scale criteria
For each bet, define what success looks like (scale criteria: double down, expand scope) and what failure looks like (exit criteria: kill, deprioritize, pivot). See Exit & Scale Criteria for examples.
Step 5: Balance and validate portfolio
Check portfolio balance (are we too conservative or too aggressive?), validate resource feasibility (can we actually staff this?), and self-assess using resources/evaluators/rubric_portfolio_roadmapping_bets.json. Minimum standard: ≥3.5 average score. See Portfolio Balance Checks.
Common Patterns
By Portfolio Type
Product Portfolio (multiple features/products):
- H1: Ship quick wins and critical bugs
- H2: Strategic features with cross-product dependencies
- H3: Platform bets and R&D exploration
- Balance: 60% incremental, 30% substantial, 10% breakthrough
Technology Portfolio (platform, infrastructure, tech debt):
- H1: Stability, security, performance quick wins
- H2: Major migrations and platform upgrades
- H3: Next-gen architecture and tooling
- Balance: 50% maintain, 30% improve, 20% transform
Innovation Portfolio (R&D, experiments, ventures):
- H1: Validated experiments ready to scale
- H2: Active experiments with checkpoints
- H3: Early-stage exploration and research
- Balance: 70% core business, 20% adjacent, 10% transformational (McKinsey Horizons)
Marketing Portfolio (campaigns, channels, experiments):
- H1: Proven channels with optimization
- H2: New channel experiments and tests
- H3: Brand building and long-term positioning
- Balance: 70% performance marketing, 20% growth experiments, 10% brand
By Bet Size
Small Bets (1-2 weeks, 1-2 people):
- Low effort, low-to-medium impact
- Use for quick wins, experiments, bug fixes
- Example: A/B test new pricing page (2 weeks, 1.2x conversion potential)
Medium Bets (1-3 months, 3-5 people):
- Moderate effort, moderate-to-high impact
- Use for features, improvements, small initiatives
- Example: Build seller dashboard (2 months, 1.8x seller retention)
Large Bets (3-6 months, 5-10 people):
- High effort, high impact
- Use for strategic initiatives, platform work, major features
- Example: Marketplace trust & safety system (5 months, 3x GMV via reduced fraud)
X-Large Bets (6-12+ months, 10+ people):
- Very high effort, transformational impact potential
- Use for platform rewrites, new business lines, moonshots
- Example: AI-powered recommendation engine (9 months, 10x engagement potential)
By Risk Profile
Core Bets (Low Risk, Incremental Return):
- Optimize existing products/channels
- Proven approaches with clear ROI
- Example: Improve search relevance from 65% → 75% accuracy
Adjacent Bets (Medium Risk, Substantial Return):
- Extend to new use cases, segments, or capabilities
- Validated approach, new application
- Example: Launch seller analytics (proven feature, new user segment)
Transformational Bets (High Risk, Breakthrough Return):
- New business models, technologies, or markets
- Unproven approach, high uncertainty
- Example: Blockchain-based ownership system (unproven tech, could unlock new market)
Portfolio Theme & Constraints
Define the strategic anchor for your portfolio:
Theme: The overarching goal (e.g., "Grow enterprise revenue 3x", "Achieve platform parity", "Launch in APAC")
Time Horizons:
- H1 (Now): 0-6 months - High confidence, shipping soon
- H2 (Next): 6-12 months - Medium confidence, in planning/development
- H3 (Later): 12-24+ months - Lower confidence, exploration/research
Resource Constraints:
- Budget: $X available across all initiatives
- People: Y engineers, Z designers, etc. (capacity by function)
- Time: When must key milestones be hit? (launch date, board meeting, fiscal year)
Portfolio Balance Targets:
- Example: 70% core / 20% adjacent / 10% transformational (McKinsey Three Horizons)
- Example: 60% product features / 30% platform / 10% R&D
- Example: 50% H1 / 30% H2 / 20% H3 (de-risk near term while investing in future)
Sequencing & Dependencies
Types: Technical (infrastructure), Learning (insights), Strategic (validation), Resource (capacity)
Heuristics: Dependencies first, learn before scaling, quick wins early, long bets start early, hedge portfolio
Exit & Scale Criteria
Exit (kill): Time-based ("90 days"), Metric ("<5% adoption"), Cost (">$X"), Strategic ("market shifts") Scale (double-down): Adoption (">20%"), Engagement (">3x baseline"), Revenue (">1.5x target"), Efficiency ("<$X CAC")
Example: AI chatbot bet | Exit: Deflection <30% after 60d OR sentiment <-20% | Scale: Deflection >50% AND sentiment >70%
Portfolio Balance Checks
Risk: ✓ ~70% core, ~20% adjacent, ~10% transformational | ❌ >80% core (too safe) or >30% transformational (too risky) Horizon: ✓ ~50-60% H1, ~25-30% H2, ~15-20% H3 | ❌ >70% H1 (no future) or >40% H3 (no near-term) Capacity: Effort ≤ capacity × 0.8 (20% slack) | Example: 10 eng → 48 EM/6mo → max 38 EM in H1 Impact: Portfolio ladders to theme (risk-adjusted) | Example: "3x revenue" → bets sum to 4.7x potential → 50% fail = 2.35x expected → add more bets
Guardrails
Problem Framing:
- ❌ Vague theme like "improve product" → ✓ Specific like "Reduce churn from 5% to 2% in 12 months"
- ❌ No constraints (infinite resources) → ✓ Explicit budget, people, time limits
- ❌ Missing portfolio balance targets → ✓ Define risk tolerance (e.g., 70/20/10)
Bet Sizing:
- ❌ Effort in person-days without context → ✓ Use S/M/L/XL relative sizing
- ❌ Impact as vague "high/medium/low" → ✓ Use multipliers (1x/3x/10x) or concrete metrics
- ❌ All bets are "high priority" → ✓ Force-rank or categorize by type
Sequencing:
- ❌ No dependencies identified → ✓ Map technical, learning, strategic dependencies
- ❌ All bets in H1 (wish list) → ✓ Realistic capacity-constrained sequencing
- ❌ No rationale for sequence → ✓ Explain why A before B (dependency, learning, quick win)
Exit & Scale Criteria:
- ❌ No criteria (just "we'll see") → ✓ Specific metrics and timelines for kill/scale decisions
- ❌ Only exit criteria (pessimistic) → ✓ Include scale criteria (what does wild success look like?)
- ❌ Unmeasurable criteria → ✓ Use quantifiable metrics with baselines
Portfolio Balance:
- ❌ All core (too safe) or all transformational (too risky) → ✓ Balanced risk distribution
- ❌ Sum of efforts exceeds capacity → ✓ Effort ≤ capacity × 0.8 (20% slack for unknowns)
- ❌ Expected impact below strategic goal → ✓ Portfolio ladders up to theme with risk adjustment
Quick Reference
Resources:
- resources/template.md - Portfolio roadmap structure and bet template
- resources/methodology.md - Horizon planning, bet sizing frameworks, portfolio balancing techniques
- resources/evaluators/rubric_portfolio_roadmapping_bets.json - Quality criteria for portfolio roadmaps
Success Criteria:
- ✓ Strategic theme is clear and measurable
- ✓ All bets sized by effort (S/M/L/XL) and impact (1x/3x/10x)
- ✓ Bets sequenced across H1/H2/H3 with dependency rationale
- ✓ Exit and scale criteria defined for each bet
- ✓ Portfolio balanced across risk profiles and horizons
- ✓ Total effort ≤ team capacity (with 20% slack)
- ✓ Expected portfolio impact ≥ strategic goal (risk-adjusted)
Common Mistakes:
- ❌ No strategic theme → roadmap becomes random wish list
- ❌ All bets sized "Large" → no useful prioritization
- ❌ No exit criteria → sunk cost fallacy, zombie projects
- ❌ Portfolio imbalanced → all quick wins (no future) or all moonshots (no near-term value)
- ❌ Dependencies ignored → H1 bets blocked by H2 infrastructure
- ❌ Over-capacity → team burns out, quality suffers
- ❌ Under-ambitious → portfolio impact below strategic goal even if everything succeeds