<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Prioritizing Archives &#187; MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="https://mgrush.com/blog/category/meeting-agendas/prioritizing-meeting-agendas/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/category/meeting-agendas/prioritizing-meeting-agendas/</link>
	<description>Compelling observations about structured, facilitative leadership</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 19:44:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">106677581</site>	<item>
		<title>Ten Key Deliverables Every Meeting Participant Has the Right to Expect</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/meeting-participant-2/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/meeting-participant-2/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2024 11:00:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Agendas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Structure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Planning Approach]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Problem Solving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scrum Events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Agile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[annotated agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Basic agenda]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Change management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facilitate innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meeting preparation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meetings that get results]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Participant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[participant preparation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Structured Meetings]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://mgrush.com/blog/?p=14863</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Even lousy movies and novels have three components: a beginning, a middle, and an end. A meeting participant (or ceremony, event, session, or workshop) should expect every session they attend to provide at least ten clear outputs. Seven clear results from the Introduction and three outputs from the Wrap. Below is a checklist of the [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/meeting-participant-2/">Ten Key Deliverables Every Meeting Participant Has the Right to Expect</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/meeting-participant-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">14863</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How To Facilitate Vague Indicators into SMART Measures and Criteria</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/smart-measures-and-criteria/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/smart-measures-and-criteria/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2023 11:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Structure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scenario planning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMART criteria]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMART Measures]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMART Objectives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[William Edwards Deming]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://mgrush.com/blog/?p=13737</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Meeting participants don&#8217;t argue about verbs and nouns, they argue about modifiers. Modifiers include adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions. For example&#8230; Facilitating the transformation of vague indicators into SMART (Specific, Measurable, Adjustable, Relevant, Time-based) measures and criteria is crucial for turning abstract ideas into actionable outcomes. When participants in a meeting debate modifiers—adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions—they&#8217;re [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/smart-measures-and-criteria/">How To Facilitate Vague Indicators into SMART Measures and Criteria</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/smart-measures-and-criteria/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">13737</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Converting New Product Ideas into Polished Product Concepts (2 of 3)</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/product-ideas/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/product-ideas/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 12:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Meeting Structure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Problem Solving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3-M]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[an idea as a thing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[catalyst]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consensus building]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decision quality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facilitate innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Product Ideas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PCM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Raw Product Idea Evolution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[raw product ideas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert Cooper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stage gate]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://mgrush.com/blog/?p=13244</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Product Concept Management (PCM or Catalyst) is the technique of designing, implementing, and continuously managing the ideation, gathering, qualifying, maintenance, archiving, and evaluation of new product ideas into fully polished concepts. This article advances facilitation training through a 3-step method you can use to transform new product ideas into innovative sources of revenue and increased [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/product-ideas/">Converting New Product Ideas into Polished Product Concepts (2 of 3)</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/product-ideas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">13244</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Risk Analysis &#8211; Method and Questions to Facilitate A Portfolio of Projects</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/risk-analysis/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/risk-analysis/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 04:01:15 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Building questions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[George day]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation portfolio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[modifying questions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Portfolio Projects]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[R-W-W]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real-win-worthj]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Risk Analysis]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=6528</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Project portfolios focused on the best opportunities, and accelerate innovation. So how do you build consensus around the term “best”? George Day’s article[1] provides excellent logic to help you drive a consensual view of risk analysis. “The risk analysis matrix employs a unique scoring system and calibration of risk. It helps estimate the probability of [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/risk-analysis/">Risk Analysis &#8211; Method and Questions to Facilitate A Portfolio of Projects</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/risk-analysis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">6528</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>What is TRIZ, When You Should You Use It, and Stop Doing the Counterproductive</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/triz/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/triz/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Mar 2017 05:01:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Problem Solving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[40 Inventive Principles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ARIZ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ASIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genrich Altshuller]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[I-TRIZ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[innovation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P-TRIZ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reverse Fishbone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SIT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TRIZ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TRIZICS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USIT]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=5437</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>TRIZ represents a methodology focused on innovative processes or product improvement. Use it when you need innovative thinking that extends beyond common process flow diagrams and requirements gathering. Look at further variations such as ARIZ, I-TRIZ, P-TRIZ, 40 Inventive Principles (with Applications in Service Operations Management), Reverse Fishbone, TRIZICS, USIT, SIT, and/or ASIT. “TRIZ” is a [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/triz/">What is TRIZ, When You Should You Use It, and Stop Doing the Counterproductive</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/triz/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">5437</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Strengthen Product Vision with a Flexibility Matrix: A Practical Lens on the Triple Constraint</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/flexibility-matrix/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/flexibility-matrix/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2017 05:01:44 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Leadership Skills]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flexibility Matrix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[product vision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Product Visions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[team charter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[time cost]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Triple constraint theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[was]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work breakdown structure]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=5344</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Triple constraint theory suggests that it is not realistic to expect to build the fastest, the cheapest, and the highest quality. Something has to “give.” Yet, most executive sponsors and product owners want all three at the same time. Triple constraint theory tells us that time, cost, and quality are the three most important considerations. [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/flexibility-matrix/">Strengthen Product Vision with a Flexibility Matrix: A Practical Lens on the Triple Constraint</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/flexibility-matrix/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">5344</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Quantitative SWOT Analysis (TO-WS) Makes it Easier &#038; Faster to Build Consensus</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/quantitative-swot/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/quantitative-swot/#comments</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2016 04:01:34 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis Methods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Structure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bookend Rhetoric]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consensual definition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[How to Categorize]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Quantitative SWOT Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMART]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SWOT analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TO-WS]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=4758</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Quantitative SWOT analysis contrasts the internal, controllable aspects of the organization (i.e., Strengths and Weaknesses) with external, uncontrollable situational factors (i.e., Opportunities and Threats) to create consensus around potential actions an organization might take to reach its goals and objectives. Qualitative situational analysis[1] provides a poor method for building consensus. In what Dr. Tufte refers [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/quantitative-swot/">Quantitative SWOT Analysis (TO-WS) Makes it Easier &#038; Faster to Build Consensus</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/quantitative-swot/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">4758</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Facilitate Root Cause Analysis that Leads Directly to Innovation and Measures</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/root-cause-analysis/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/root-cause-analysis/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2016 11:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Problem Solving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CTQ]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fishbone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ishakawa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[KPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[OKR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perspectives]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Root cause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Root cause analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SMART]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=4440</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>By using root cause analysis, you can develop Objectives and Key Results (OKR), Critical to Quality (CTQ), Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), and Objectives/ Key Results (OKRs). Sometimes referred to as Ishikawa or “Fishbone” diagrams, the procedure builds a visual mind map that identifies possible causes. By applying various perspectives and asking sharper questions, you can [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/root-cause-analysis/">Facilitate Root Cause Analysis that Leads Directly to Innovation and Measures</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/root-cause-analysis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">4440</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scope Creep Kills: Facilitate Concern, Influence, and Control</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/concern-influence-and-control/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/concern-influence-and-control/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2016 04:01:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Managing Conflict]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bookend]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concern influence and control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consensual sphere of concern influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facilitate concern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facilitate control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[facilitate influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grey matter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Powerball]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://facilitativeleadership.wordpress.com/?p=866</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Scope creep kills projects. It also kills meetings. The consensual sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control helps a group become mindful of aspects that could alter the group&#8217;s attitudes, beliefs, and decisions. The consensual sphere of Concern, Influence, and Control helps a group to focus, on one issue at a time, or one aspect at [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/concern-influence-and-control/">Scope Creep Kills: Facilitate Concern, Influence, and Control</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/concern-influence-and-control/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">866</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Facilitate Prioritization and Build Consensus Quickly (or, MoSCoW)</title>
		<link>https://mgrush.com/blog/facilitate-prioritization/</link>
					<comments>https://mgrush.com/blog/facilitate-prioritization/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Facilitation Expert]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2016 04:01:04 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Decision Making]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Meeting Structure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Prioritizing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alignment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Book-ends]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bookend Rhetoric]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Decision Matrix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Definitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dumb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facilitate Prioritization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MoSCoW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PowerBalls]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCAMPER method]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mgrush.com/blog/?p=4276</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>Strongly encouraged by Steve Jobs, as mentioned in his biography by Walter Isaacson, here is how to facilitate reducing some possible actions a team should consider, down to the final three or four actions your team has the resources to complete. As mentioned casually in the biography, the concept of prioritization is key to group [&#8230;]</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog/facilitate-prioritization/">How to Facilitate Prioritization and Build Consensus Quickly (or, MoSCoW)</a> appeared first on <a href="https://mgrush.com/blog">MG RUSH Facilitation Best Practices Blog</a>.</p>
]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://mgrush.com/blog/facilitate-prioritization/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">4276</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
