Lesson 6 asks learners to think like a Product Owner in time. Up to this point, they have clarified a product vision, mapped users and stakeholders, and drafted and refined user stories with acceptance criteria. Now they must decide what happens first, how to group work into meaningful outcomes, and how to express that sequence as a roadmap that humans can understand.
The lesson begins by distinguishing three related but different artifacts: the backlog, the priority stack, and the roadmap. The backlog is the inventory of options—a living collection of stories and ideas. The priority stack is the current ordering of what matters most right now. The roadmap is a story over time that shows how those priorities will unfold into outcomes for users and stakeholders.
Prioritization Lenses
Learners work with a lightweight set of lenses—value, effort, risk, and dependencies. For each story in a small backlog slice, they ask: Who benefits and how strongly (value)? How large and complex does this work feel (effort)? How much is unknown or at risk if we are wrong (risk)? What must exist before this work can truly succeed (dependencies)?
These lenses do not produce an automatic ranking. Instead, they make trade-offs visible and explicit. A story might be high value but also high effort. Another might be small and low-risk but only moderately valuable. The learner’s job is to see these patterns and make intentional choices.
From Stories to Outcome Themes
Next, learners move beyond individual stories and cluster them into outcome themes. These themes are written in user-centered language and describe what will be different for the people who use or are affected by the product. For example: “Reduce friction for first-time users,” “Give teachers clearer signals about student progress,” or “Increase leadership visibility into school performance.”
Within each theme, learners consider which story should come first. They look for quick wins that build confidence, foundational work that unlocks future value, and risk-reducing experiments that protect the system from expensive mistakes. The result is a small set of themes, each with an ordered list of stories that expresses a theory of how value will unfold.
Drafting an Outcome-Based Roadmap
Learners then place their themes and stories into simple time horizons, such as “Now/Next/Later” or a few near-term quarters. The emphasis is not on creating a detailed Gantt chart, but on telling a clear story: here is what we will do first, here is what comes after, and here is why.
As they build this first-pass roadmap, learners write a short caption that connects the plan back to their product vision and stakeholder ecosystem. They explain what users and stakeholders can expect in the “Now” horizon, what kinds of improvements will likely arrive “Next,” and what ambitious or longer-term outcomes sit in “Later.”
Seeing and Naming Trade-Offs
Throughout the studio, learners are encouraged to name the trade-offs in their plan. Choosing one theme to advance first means deferring others. Focusing on risk reduction may pause more visible new features. Serving one stakeholder group may temporarily frustrate another. By articulating these trade-offs directly, learners practice the Product Owner posture of making choices on purpose rather than by accident.
Preparing for Roadmap Review
The lesson closes with a reflection on where prioritization felt straightforward and where it felt messy or political. Learners identify which stakeholder might challenge their roadmap and how they would explain their decisions. This reflection sets the stage for Lesson 6.1, where they will present and defend their roadmap to a simulated stakeholder panel and refine both the visual artifact and the narrative.
A learner demonstrates readiness for Lesson 6.1 when they can produce a small, outcome-based roadmap that flows logically from their vision, stakeholder ecosystem, and backlog slice, and when they can briefly explain why their chosen ordering is the best next step given the current constraints and opportunities.