Opportunity Scoring

Opportunity scoring is a prioritization method that ranks customer needs by how important they are and how poorly today's solutions satisfy them. It comes from Anthony Ulwick's Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) method and uses survey ratings to find underserved needs worth investing in, as well as overserved needs where a simpler product could compete.

How Opportunity Scoring Works

Opportunity scoring starts with needs, not features. In ODI these needs are written as desired outcome statements: the measurable results customers want when getting a job done, phrased independently of any solution, for example "minimize the time it takes to submit an expense receipt."

A representative sample of customers then rates each outcome twice, typically on a 1 to 10 scale:

• Importance: how much this outcome matters to them.
• Satisfaction: how well their current solution delivers it.

Ulwick's opportunity algorithm combines the two:

Opportunity = Importance + max(Importance − Satisfaction, 0)

Importance counts twice: once on its own and once in the gap. The max(..., 0) part means an outcome that is already over-satisfied gets no extra credit, but is not pushed below its importance either. High scores point to needs that are important and underserved. Plotting importance against satisfaction shows the whole picture, with underserved needs in one corner and overserved ones in another.

Why Opportunity Scoring Matters

Most prioritization methods rank solutions the team has already thought of. Opportunity scoring ranks problems first, using customer data rather than internal opinion. That makes it a strong input for deciding where to focus discovery and which areas of an existing product deserve investment.

It also exposes overserved needs, places where the product does more than customers value. Those are candidates for simplification, or signs that a competitor could win with a cheaper, more focused offering.

The method has limits. Results depend on well-written outcome statements and a large enough sample, and the score says what to work on, not how. The team still has to find a solution that actually closes the gap.

Opportunity Scoring Example

An expense-management team surveys finance managers on three outcomes (scores out of 10):

• Minimize the time it takes to submit a receipt: importance 9, satisfaction 4. Opportunity = 9 + 5 = 14.
• Minimize the chance a report is rejected for missing data: importance 8, satisfaction 7. Opportunity = 8 + 1 = 9.
• Customize the look of expense reports: importance 3, satisfaction 6. Opportunity = 3 + 0 = 3.

Receipt capture is the clear priority. Report customization is overserved, so the team stops investing there.

Opportunity Scoring vs. the Kano Model

Both methods use customer surveys, but they answer different questions. The Kano model classifies features by how their presence or absence affects satisfaction. Opportunity scoring ranks underlying needs by the size of the gap between importance and satisfaction. Opportunity scoring builds directly on Jobs to be Done thinking, since the outcomes describe what customers are trying to achieve, and it complements qualitative user research that uncovers those outcomes in the first place.