Frameboard

Every sprint, PMs burn time arguing "what's next?" across spreadsheets, sticky notes, and Slack threads. Existing tools split into two camps. The ones that lock you to a single framework (RICE-only, ICE-only) shut out teams whose baseline is somewhere else. The other camp is open and flexible but charges per seat or per workspace, so a 10-minute decision needs a budget request first. The result: prioritization meetings turn into "clean up the numbers" time, while the real conversation - why does this matter more? - gets squeezed into the last five minutes.

Built from the QA seat, watching prioritization and release calls - the experience of using a prioritization tool was itself the requirement. RICE on paper doesn't show you why the score distribution comes out the way it does until you spin it through a real board. Improvements surfaced as I used it. Going open source removes the budget-approval step, so a 10-minute decision can stay a 10-minute decision for other teams that need it.

PO/PM and product leads running prioritization workshops at team level.

Pick the framework per workspace, let each member record their own score, aggregate automatically - and the prioritization meeting shifts from "cleaning numbers" to "debating disagreement."

• Polymorphic board across RICE / ICE / MoSCoW / Value × Effort - input columns, legend, and formula switch by framework
• Team scoring - invite members, one score row per person, with average · contributors · min-max spread shown in a single cell
• Ship-it toggle - completed items get struck through and sink to the bottom of the board; a retrospective toggle is separate
• Effort × Score scatter plot + Top-N bar chart (RICE)
• CSV / Notion / Linear export, GitHub OAuth, self-hostable via Docker Compose

• Framework is a free choice per workspace - accepting the reality that teams are anchored to different baselines
• Average exposed alongside min-max spread - showing only an average pretends consensus exists where dissent has been hidden
• Open source plus free deploy on Cloudflare Pages - lowering the adoption cost is what creates the first entry

• One board component switches the input columns, legend, and formula correctly for each of the four frameworks (RICE / ICE / MoSCoW / Value × Effort)
• On a mode switch, no regression where another framework's formula gets applied or input columns disappear
• Each framework's scoring formula is deterministic, so the same inputs always yield the same ranking and scatter position (pinned by 129 backend pytest tests)
• In per-member aggregation, the average survives without the min-max spread silently dying - so noise pretending to be consensus doesn't erase the disagreement
• Framework-switch flows are pinned as E2E scenarios so all four modes hold equal weight across refactors
• Export (CSV / Notion / Linear) reflects each framework's column structure correctly and round-trips without data loss
• On OSS self-hosting (Docker Compose), auth and data integrity hold identically to the managed environment

Open-source alpha - live at frameboard.pages.dev. Backend pytest at 129 tests, 5 E2E scenarios, CI green.

Building my own PM workflow as a tool confirmed that "prioritization is the trigger that starts a conversation, not the score that ends it." The conversation only really begins when the cell shows the score range across members - "why is yours an 8 and mine a 3?" The average pretends consensus exists where it doesn't; the min-max spread is the actual door into the discussion. Next round's hypothesis is that the discussion trail itself - preserved alongside the score - is what changes the meeting.

• Started this as a "score-the-items" tool; using it confirmed the value is being the trigger that starts a discussion. The next round redesigns from preserving the discussion trail first.