How to Prioritize Discovered Problems: A Framework for Founders

You’ve done the research. You’ve talked to users, scoured forums, analyzed feedback, and compiled a list of problems your potential customers face. Now you’re staring at a spreadsheet with dozens of pain points, and the question hits you: Which one do I solve first?

How do you prioritize discovered problems when every issue seems important? This is the crossroads where many founders stumble. Choose the wrong problem, and you might spend months building something nobody wants. Choose wisely, and you’ve got a validated path to product-market fit.

In this guide, we’ll walk through proven frameworks and practical strategies to help you prioritize discovered problems like a seasoned product leader. Whether you’re validating your first startup idea or deciding on your next feature, these approaches will give you clarity and confidence.

Why Problem Prioritization Matters More Than You Think

Before diving into frameworks, let’s understand why prioritization deserves serious attention. Many founders assume all customer problems are worth solving, but that’s a dangerous mindset.

The reality is that your resources - time, money, and energy - are finite. Every problem you choose to tackle means saying no to others. Poor prioritization leads to:

• Wasted development time: Building features nobody uses
• Diluted focus: Trying to solve too many problems at once
• Missed opportunities: Ignoring high-impact problems for low-value ones
• Slower time to market: Getting bogged down in complexity
• Higher burn rate: Spending resources on the wrong things

The problems you prioritize become your product roadmap. They determine what you build, who you serve, and ultimately, whether your business succeeds.

The ICE Framework: Impact, Confidence, Ease

One of the most popular methods to prioritize discovered problems is the ICE scoring framework. Originally developed for growth experiments, it works brilliantly for problem prioritization.

How ICE Scoring Works

For each discovered problem, assign a score from 1-10 across three dimensions:

Impact: How significantly will solving this problem affect your users and business? Consider potential revenue, user satisfaction, and market size.

Confidence: How certain are you about this problem’s validity? Do you have strong evidence from multiple sources, or is it based on assumptions?

Ease: How simple is it to solve this problem? Factor in development time, technical complexity, and resource requirements.

Calculate the ICE score by averaging the three numbers: (Impact + Confidence + Ease) ÷ 3. Problems with higher ICE scores should generally be tackled first.

Practical Example

Let’s say you’ve discovered three problems in the project management space:

• Problem A: Users struggle to track time across projects (Impact: 8, Confidence: 9, Ease: 7) = ICE Score: 8.0
• Problem B: Teams can’t collaborate on documents in real-time (Impact: 9, Confidence: 6, Ease: 4) = ICE Score: 6.3
• Problem C: Mobile app lacks offline functionality (Impact: 7, Confidence: 8, Ease: 3) = ICE Score: 6.0

Based on ICE scoring, Problem A should be your priority despite Problem B having higher impact, because of the combination of confidence and ease.

The RICE Framework: Adding Reach to Your Analysis

RICE builds on ICE by adding “Reach” - how many people are affected by this problem. This is particularly useful when you’re choosing between problems that impact different user segments.

The formula is: (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort

• Reach: Number of users/customers affected per time period
• Impact: Scored as 3 (massive), 2 (high), 1 (medium), 0.5 (low), 0.25 (minimal)
• Confidence: Percentage (100% = high confidence, 50% = medium, 20% = low)
• Effort: Person-months required to solve

RICE is particularly valuable when you need to balance broad impact against depth of pain. A problem affecting 10,000 users moderately might score higher than one affecting 100 users severely.

Evidence-Based Prioritization: Validating Problem Severity

Numbers and frameworks are helpful, but they’re only as good as the data behind them. When prioritizing discovered problems, you need solid evidence to inform your confidence scores.

Types of Evidence to Collect

Frequency indicators: How often is this problem mentioned? Track the number of forum posts, support tickets, or user interviews where the issue surfaces.

Intensity signals: How emotionally charged are the discussions? Users who write lengthy rants or repeatedly mention a problem are experiencing genuine pain.

Engagement metrics: On platforms like Reddit, upvotes and comment counts indicate how many people resonate with a problem.

Willingness to pay: The ultimate validation. Have people explicitly stated they’d pay for a solution? Are they currently using workarounds or inferior alternatives?

Temporal patterns: Is this a persistent problem or a temporary frustration? Long-standing issues with sustained discussion are typically more valuable.

Building Your Evidence Base

Create a simple spreadsheet tracking discovered problems with columns for:

• Problem description
• Source (where you found it)
• Number of mentions
• Sentiment intensity (1-10)
• Direct quotes from users
• Links to original discussions
• Estimated affected users

This evidence base becomes your source of truth when debate arises about which problem to tackle next.

Using PainOnSocial for Data-Driven Problem Prioritization

While manual research provides valuable insights, analyzing hundreds of Reddit discussions to prioritize discovered problems can be overwhelming. This is where a structured approach with the right tools becomes essential.

PainOnSocial specifically addresses the evidence-gathering challenge by analyzing real Reddit discussions and automatically scoring pain points from 0-100 based on frequency and intensity. Instead of manually tracking mentions and sentiment across multiple threads, you get structured data showing which problems appear most often and generate the strongest reactions.

The tool provides the exact evidence you need for confidence scoring in frameworks like ICE or RICE: real user quotes, discussion permalinks, and upvote counts from 30+ curated subreddit communities. This means when you’re debating whether to score a problem’s confidence as 7 or 9, you have concrete data - not just gut feeling - backing your decision.

For founders working through problem prioritization, this transforms assumptions into validated insights, helping you identify which discovered problems deserve attention based on actual user frustration rather than guesswork.

The MoSCoW Method: Categorical Prioritization

Sometimes you need a simpler approach than numerical scoring. The MoSCoW method categorizes problems into four buckets:

• Must Have: Critical problems that must be solved for your product to work
• Should Have: Important problems that significantly improve the experience
• Could Have: Nice-to-solve problems that add value but aren’t essential
• Won’t Have (now): Problems you consciously decide not to address currently

This method works well for early-stage startups defining their MVP. It forces clear decisions about what’s truly essential versus what’s just interesting.

The Value vs. Complexity Matrix

Visual thinkers often prefer mapping problems on a 2×2 matrix with “Value to Users” on one axis and “Complexity to Solve” on the other.

This creates four quadrants:

• Quick Wins: High value, low complexity - your top priorities
• Major Projects: High value, high complexity - important but require planning
• Fill-Ins: Low value, low complexity - tackle when you have spare capacity
• Time Sinks: Low value, high complexity - generally avoid these

Plot each discovered problem on this matrix during team discussions. It creates immediate visual clarity about where to focus.

Considering Strategic Alignment

Beyond pure scoring, consider how each problem aligns with your strategic goals:

Market positioning: Does solving this problem differentiate you from competitors or make you a “me too” product?

Target customer: Does this problem affect your ideal customer profile, or is it a distraction from your core market?

Business model: Can you monetize the solution effectively, or would it be a free feature?

Long-term vision: Does this problem align with where you want the company to be in 3-5 years?

Competitive moats: Would solving this create defensible advantages, or is it easily replicable?

The Sequencing Question: Order Matters

Even after scoring problems, sequencing matters. Some problems are prerequisites for others. Some create momentum that makes subsequent problems easier to tackle.

Consider These Sequencing Factors

Dependencies: Must Problem A be solved before Problem B makes sense?

Learning opportunities: Will tackling this problem first teach you something valuable for future problems?

Market momentum: Will solving this problem create buzz and attract users who care about other problems too?

Revenue acceleration: Does this problem unlock monetization that funds solving other problems?

Team capability: Do you have the right skills now, or should you hire before tackling certain problems?

Common Prioritization Mistakes to Avoid

Watch out for these pitfalls when prioritizing discovered problems:

The Shiny Object Syndrome: Chasing the newest problem you discovered instead of systematically evaluating all options.

Founder Bias: Prioritizing problems you personally find interesting rather than what users need most.

Analysis Paralysis: Spending so much time prioritizing that you never actually solve anything.

Ignoring Ease: Only focusing on impact and tackling problems that take years to solve.

Assuming One Framework Rules All: Different situations require different approaches - use multiple frameworks and triangulate.

Deprioritizing Based on Competition: Avoiding problems because competitors are working on them, when those might be the most validated opportunities.

Building a Living Prioritization System

Problem prioritization isn’t a one-time activity. Markets change, new evidence emerges, and your capabilities evolve. Build a system that adapts:

• Review priorities monthly or quarterly
• Update scores as you gather new evidence
• Archive solved problems and celebrate wins
• Add newly discovered problems to your backlog
• Involve your team in prioritization discussions
• Document your reasoning for future reference

When to Reprioritize

Certain triggers should prompt reprioritization:

• A competitor launches a solution to one of your target problems
• User feedback reveals a problem is more/less severe than estimated
• Market conditions change significantly
• Your solution to one problem reveals unexpected insights
• Resource constraints (funding, team size) shift
• New regulations or technical capabilities emerge

Making the Final Decision

After scoring, analyzing, and discussing, you still need to make a decision. Here’s a final checklist:

• Do we have strong evidence this problem exists and matters?
• Can we articulate exactly who experiences this problem?
• Do we have a clear hypothesis for a solution?
• Can we validate our solution relatively quickly?
• Does this align with our strategic goals?
• Do we have (or can we acquire) the capabilities to solve it?
• Will solving this create meaningful value for users and our business?

If you can answer “yes” to most of these questions, you’ve found a problem worth prioritizing.

Conclusion: Prioritization as Competitive Advantage

Learning how to prioritize discovered problems isn’t just about efficiency - it’s about building the right product. The best founders don’t just find problems; they identify which problems matter most and sequence their solution optimally.

Start with frameworks like ICE or RICE to bring structure to your decision-making. Back your scores with solid evidence from user research, community discussions, and real-world validation. Consider strategic alignment, sequencing, and resource constraints. Most importantly, don’t let perfect be the enemy of good - make a decision, validate quickly, and adjust as you learn.

The problems you choose to solve define your product. Choose wisely, and you’ll build something users genuinely need. Rush the prioritization process, and you’ll waste precious time on problems that don’t move the needle.

Remember: every “yes” to one problem is a “not yet” to others. Make those trade-offs consciously, strategically, and with conviction. Your future users - and your business - will thank you for it.