# Example 17 — Case study: 8 requests, only 3 fit next quarter

## Why this case matters

This is where PM and product-leader judgment becomes visible.
The hard part is not ranking items. The hard part is choosing what does **not** get done.

## Scene

The team only has room for 3 priorities next quarter.
CEO wants growth, sales wants enterprise readiness, and support keeps escalating onboarding confusion.

## Raw messy input

> “We only have room for 3 of these 8 requests next quarter. Help me prioritize them and explain what should wait.”

## What a weak default answer often does badly

- starts with a framework instead of a quarter objective
- gives a soft top 4 or top 5
- acknowledges stakeholder tension but does not resolve it
- says lower items can be revisited later without making a real below-the-line call

## What `pm-workbench` should do better

- define the period objective first
- make one real portfolio bet explicit
- produce a defendable top 3
- state what is below the line and why
- provide leadership-friendly framing for the trade-off

## Example response shape

- quarter objective
- recommended top 3
- below-the-line set
- main trade-off being made
- how to explain the call to leadership and stakeholders

## Suggested output shape

**Prioritization Stack**

## Why this is valuable in real PM work

A real priority call is not a ranking exercise. It is an explicit resource decision with organizational consequences.
