The Daily TIE Score - A Prioritisation Method for Automating Manual Tasks | #44
Discover the Daily TIE Score, a prioritisation formula for automating tasks based on time, error impact, and cognitive effort.
I’m a few weeks into my new role now, and am getting stuck into discovery on my first project. I’m on an internal facing product team - similar to a platform team like my last role, but with building features on apps like Salesforce + NetSuite for internal stakeholders.
The first outcome in the project we have identified is to automate many of the manual tasks that are currently being done by our internal stakeholders.
Using opportunity solution trees, I was able to break the problem down into its smaller parts, but traditional Reach and Impact rankings weren’t providing the depth I needed for effective prioritisation.
I wanted something to show how much time someone was spending on one of these manual tasks, but again, that doesn’t give enough depth either. Something can take ten minutes, but be a completely mindless task.
On the contrary, something with a high cognitive load can also take ten minutes, but that would have a higher priority since that causes context switching, and the stakeholder might not be able to multitask while they are doing it.
After getting some help from ChatPRD (a cool resource on chatgpt pro) they told me to also add a metric for the impact of error - a way of considering the consequences and severity of mistakes in performing the task.
With that, I came up with…
The Daily TIE Score
Daily TIE Score: (Daily Time (T) X Impact (Error or Success) (I) X Energy (E))/10
I’ve adjusted the formula by dividing by ten, making the score manageable and user-friendly.
I’ve also created a guide on how you can ask stakeholders for these metrics using slack automation with emojis on comments.
Note: I’ve made a pretty big change to my way of thinking for the Impact of Error field since I originally created this article.
Originally it was intended to be used separately to the Impact field I use for RICE scoring or Reach X Impact, but this was annoying to keep track of both and was confusing to explain.
I wanted to make this more user-friendly and consistent across multiple teams and projects, and I felt people wouldn’t adopt it if they have to track two different impact fields.
So, now I am tracking the impact of either the error OR success, so you only need one field to measure impact, whether it’s a feature’s success or an automation's potential failure.
You simply focus on whichever outcome has the highest impact.
After trialling it for a few weeks, this still works well with my TIE Score, and now works great when RICE scoring too, and my outcome for automation is easier to prioritise with other outcomes.
Here are the options and the description where needed. The weight is in the brackets for you to use this formula yourself.
Daily Time (T) - The average time per day you spend doing this task
<1 minute (1)
1-5 minutes (2)
5-10 minutes (3)
10-30 minutes (4)
30-60 minutes (5)
>1 hour (6)
Impact (I) (for shorter form answers, check the bottom of the post)
Negligible (1): Success or errors have little to no impact on the overall outcome. Improvements are negligible, and mistakes don't cause any noticeable disruption.
Low (2): Success leads to small improvements in workflow or efficiency. Errors may cause minor inconveniences or require small, non-disruptive corrections without significant impact.
Moderate (3): Success brings clear, meaningful improvements (e.g., noticeable time savings or improved accuracy). Errors cause moderate disruptions that require effort to correct and may slow productivity, but don’t cause major damage.
High (4): Success results in considerable benefits, such as significant efficiency gains or cost savings. Errors, on the other hand, lead to major setbacks, consuming significant resources to fix or harming key relationships.
Critical (5): Success creates transformative outcomes, such as new revenue streams, major competitive advantages, or improved safety. Errors result in severe consequences, like legal issues, significant financial loss, or safety risks.
Energy (E) - A measure of the mental effort and focus needed for the task
Mindless (1) - Little to no thinking or focus required. Mindless actions that can be done while doing other tasks
Light Focus (2) - Some minor concentration or focus is required. Multi-tasking still possible if the other task has limited focus requirement
Moderate Focus (3) - A decent portion of either mental concentration or focus is required that will cause a significant context switch. Notable disruption to multitasking.
High Focus (4) - Requires a full context switch from previous tasks and either full focus or mental concentration is required.
Intense Focus (5) - Complex and demanding tasks with a high cognitive load that require full focus and a complete context switch from any other tasks.
Here’s how that might look if you use (and love) Jira discovery like myself.
Update: Looking to set up a Jira Discovery Project for yourself? Check out the first of my series on Jira Product Discovery here
Integrating the Daily TIE Score could help how you prioritise the removal or automation of recurring tasks or workflows in your product. It shifts focus from simply removing the most time consuming tasks to strategically optimising efforts based on actual cognitive load and risk as well.
This prioritisation tool not only enhances productivity but also directs our attention to where we can make the most significant impact on our daily operations.
Some dropdown menus won’t allow you to have the long form answers like I have in the impact options above, so here is a shorter version without the examples. I’d still encourage you to put the longer form version in the field description or sheet header, wherever you have it.
Impact (I)
Negligible (1): Success or errors have minimal impact.
Low (2): Success brings slight improvements; errors cause minor inconvenience.
Moderate (3): Success leads to meaningful gains; errors cause moderate disruptions.
High (4): Success offers significant benefits; errors result in major setbacks.
Critical (5): Success is game-changing; errors lead to severe consequences.
If you want to just use Impact of error like I originally described, here are the old values:
Impact of Error (I)
Negligible (1): Errors have minimal or no consequences on the overall outcome.
Low (2): Errors may cause minor inconveniences or require small corrections without significant effects.
Moderate (3): Errors that can lead to noticeable disruptions or require moderate effort to correct, impacting performance.
High (4): Errors result in significant setbacks, require considerable resources to manage, or damage relationships.
Critical (5): Errors have severe consequences, such as legal repercussions, substantial financial loss, or safety risks.
This article is one of my weekly tips, but it is also a part of my Support Driven Development series that you can find here.
For my past tips check out my past posts on Substack or check out the hashtag #JohnsTipOfTheWeek on LinkedIn.
How do you get realistic numbers for I or E? Those seem easy to game for stakeholders that really want their special project at the top of the list.