Should prioritization always happen in a meeting?

No. Many teams collect input before the meeting and use meeting time only to discuss disagreements or important trade-offs. This usually results in shorter and more productive sessions.

Is asynchronous scoring better than live scoring?

Neither is universally better. Asynchronous scoring gives people time to think independently, while live scoring encourages discussion and immediate alignment. Many teams use both depending on the situation.

Should every stakeholder participate?

Not necessarily. The most valuable input comes from people with relevant expertise. Product Management, Engineering, Customer Success, Sales, and Leadership may all contribute different perspectives depending on the work being prioritized.

Should the highest score always become the highest priority?

No. Scores provide structured input, but they don't replace product judgment. Product Owners remain responsible for balancing customer value, strategy, business priorities, technical constraints, and other considerations before making the final decision.

Can different teams use different prioritization workflows?

Absolutely. Many organizations use independent evaluation for routine backlog grooming, live workshops for strategic planning, and a combination of both for major roadmap decisions. The best workflow is the one that helps your team make clear, consistent, and well-informed prioritization decisions.

How Product Teams Gather Input for Better Prioritization Decisions

Every product team eventually faces the same question: what should we build next? The answer isn't usually found in a prioritization framework or an issue tracker. It's found by gathering the right input from the right people. Some teams prefer independent evaluation, giving everyone time to think before discussing priorities. Others rely on collaborative workshops where ideas evolve through conversation. Many teams combine both approaches. None of these methods is universally better — the best approach depends on your team, your backlog, and the type of decision you're making. One thing, however, remains true: prioritization frameworks provide information, Product Owners make decisions.

Independent Evaluation (Async)

Best for: Distributed teams, larger backlogs, or when participants need time to review issues carefully.

Instead of scheduling a meeting immediately, participants review and score issues on their own. This gives everyone the opportunity to:

Read the issue carefully.
Review customer feedback or supporting documentation.
Think through the trade-offs without time pressure.
Score issues independently without being influenced by others.

Once everyone has finished, the results are combined into an initial ranking.

Advantages: Everyone has an equal opportunity to contribute. Reduces groupthink and bias. Higher quality evaluations because people have time to think. Easy to include stakeholders who wouldn't normally attend planning meetings.

Things to watch for: Because people work independently, questions or misunderstandings may not be discovered until later. A follow-up discussion is often helpful for issues where opinions differ significantly.

Live Team Workshops

Best for: Roadmap planning, strategic discussions, or smaller backlogs.

Instead of scoring independently, the team evaluates issues together during a meeting. A typical session looks like this:

Review the issue.
Everyone submits a score.
Reveal the results.
Discuss any differences.
Re-score if necessary.
Move to the next issue.

The discussion itself becomes part of the prioritization process, allowing participants to challenge assumptions and share new information before finalizing their scores.

Advantages: Immediate discussion and clarification. Shared understanding develops quickly. Great for complex decisions with multiple trade-offs. Teams leave the meeting aligned on priorities.

Things to watch for: Without good facilitation, stronger personalities can influence the discussion. Live sessions also become less practical as the backlog grows.

Async First, Live Second

Many experienced product teams combine both approaches.

Participants score issues independently before the meeting.

The meeting is then used to review the results, discuss issues where opinions differ, and make final decisions. Instead of spending an hour scoring twenty issues together, the team spends that time discussing the four or five issues that actually need conversation.

This approach combines the strengths of both workflows: independent thinking before discussion, more focused meetings, better use of everyone's time, and decisions supported by multiple perspectives.

For many teams, this becomes the default way of running backlog prioritization.

Prioritization Isn't a Vote

One of the biggest misconceptions about collaborative prioritization is that the highest average score automatically determines what gets built next. Experienced Product Owners rarely work that way.

Different people bring different perspectives:

Engineering understands implementation effort.
Customer Success understands customer pain.
Sales understands market demand.
Leadership understands business priorities.
Product Management balances all of those perspectives against the product strategy.

Each viewpoint provides another piece of the picture.

The Product Owner's role isn't to average opinions. It's to make the best possible decision using all of the available information.

Sometimes the highest-ranked issue becomes the next priority. Sometimes strategic commitments, technical dependencies, regulatory requirements, or key customer opportunities justify a different decision.

Good prioritization combines structured input with product judgment.

Which Approach Should You Choose?

Independent Evaluation — best for large or distributed teams; main strength is better individual thinking and broader participation.
Live Workshop — best for strategic discussions and smaller backlogs; main strength is fast collaboration and shared understanding.
Async First, Live Second — best for most product organizations; main strength is independent input followed by focused discussion.

Many teams don't use the same approach every time. A quarterly roadmap planning session may benefit from a live workshop, while weekly backlog prioritization works well with independent scoring followed by a short review meeting.

The important thing is choosing a process that helps your team make better decisions — not longer meetings.

How CoJii Supports These Workflows

CoJii is designed to support the way modern product teams prioritize work.

Whether your team prefers independent evaluation, live workshops, or a combination of both, CoJii helps you gather input, compare perspectives, and make informed prioritization decisions.

With CoJii you can:

Import issues directly from Linear.
Share scoring sessions for independent evaluation.
Run live collaborative scoring sessions.
Reveal scores and re-score issues after discussion.
Compare where people agree — and where they don't.
Review results from multiple scoring sessions before making a final decision.
Sync agreed priorities back into Linear.

CoJii doesn't decide priorities for you.

It helps Product Owners gather better input, facilitate better discussions, and make better-informed prioritization decisions.