Many task tracking tools, such as Jira, Asana, and Plane, feature a task field named Priority. This field is typically set by the task author during task creation as a way to convey the urgency of the task from the author to the team which executes the task. In this post I will explain:

1. How Priority causes communication problems

2. Propose using an alternative prioritization framework called CD3

How Priority causes communication problems

The trouble begins when the task author's priorities are misaligned with the
execution team's priorities. As it turns out, in larger organizations this
misalignment is the norm, each working within their own sphere of duties, being
measured by separate management with differing goals.

Outside-in
When set by the author, the Priority field often represents only the urgency of the
task from the author's point of view, typically a view from outside the
execution team's current priorities. The author, having set a high Priority,
expects the task to be worked on right away.

Inside-out
The execution team must prioritize the new task against their current work,
but without additional context from the author, the Priority field alone
provides little to no clarity for the execution team when compared to the rest
of their backlog. Furthermore, less experienced execution team members will
often misunderstand the meaning of the Priority field and believe the author
did have all context necessary to correctly set the value, leading the
well-meaning team member to gladly work on the new task above other, more
truly valuable tasks.

Summary: Using the Priority field alone, neither author nor the execution team understands the true priority of the task.

An alternative proritization framework: CD3

What is needed is for task authors and execution teams to apply a common, well
understood, priority framework to all tasks. A framework not based purely on
a single perspective, but multiple perspectives, a framework of economic value: enter
Cost-of-Delay and CD3.

Cost-of-Delay

Cost-of-Delay (CoD) goes beyond the vague High, Medium, Low values of the
Priority field, and adds a layer of economic thinking. Cost-of-Delay is the
cost of not doing something sooner. It answers the question:

“How much money, value, or opportunity are we losing every week (or day) that this task or feature isn’t delivered?”

So instead of just labeling something as “High Priority,” Cost-of-Delay helps
you quantify how important it really is, with numbers that are relevant whether
you are a member of the execution team or not.

Example:

Let’s say you have two features:

• Feature A would earn $1,000/week once released
• Feature B would earn $100/week

Even if Feature B is “High Priority”, Cost-of-Delay tells you that delaying
Feature A costs more money every week to leave in the backlog.

Taking it further with CD3

Once you know the Cost-of-Delay, you can divide it by the estimated duration of
the task to get CD3: Cost-of-Delay Divided by Duration. This simple but powerful
formula helps us prioritize any type or size of task so we deliver the highest
impact work first.

CD3 = CoD / Duration

Let's go back to our example, updating it with Duration:

• Feature A would earn $1,000/week once released. It will take 12 weeks to implement.
• Feature B would earn $100/week. It will take one week to implement.

Now apply CD3 to see the true priority of these tasks:

• Feature A: 1000/12 = 83.33
• Feature B: 100/1 = 100

Now it's clear to see, Feature B is the highest priority because it delivers the
most economic value per unit of effort.

Boiling it down:

1. Estimate Cost of Delay: Quantify the financial impact of delaying each item in the backlog. (Task authors should do this.)

2. Estimate Duration: Determine the expected time required to complete each item. (Execution teams should do this.)

3. Calculate CD3: Divide the Cost-of-Delay by the estimated Duration.

4. Prioritize: Rank items based on their CD3 scores, prioritizing those with higher scores.

Conclusion

The traditional Priority field, while well-intentioned, often misleads both task
authors and execution teams by failing to represent the true urgency or value of
a task. Misalignments and lack of shared context turn this field into an
anti-pattern, one that fosters confusion instead of clarity.

By shifting to an economic framework like Cost-of-Delay and CD3, teams can make
more informed, objective decisions that transcend departmental boundaries and
align everyone around real impact. This approach replaces assumptions with
quantifiable value, ensuring that the most valuable work, not just the loudest,
is prioritized first.