Choose a feasible work portfolio under a fixed capacity limit and explain what assumptions could change the priority.
Problem
Context. Several optional projects compete for the same four engineer-weeks in the invented exercise below.
Task. Compare feasible portfolios, select one, and explain opportunity cost and evidence that could reverse the choice. Connect the reasoning to how you prioritize real work without claiming invented values as measured outcomes.
Constraints. Projects are indivisible and independent, and their modeled benefits add on one common scale. Respect capacity and mandatory obligations before optimizing optional value; dependencies or overlapping benefits change the calculation.
In this hypothetical exercise, four engineer-weeks are available:
| Project | Engineer-weeks | Modeled value units |
|---|---|---|
| A | 4 | 100 |
| B | 2 | 60 |
| C | 2 | 55 |
All projects are optional, independently staffed and indivisible; benefits add without overlap on this invented common scale. Which portfolio fits? What could reverse the choice?
Picture: Choosing One Uses Capacity Elsewhere
Choosing A gives up the higher assumed value of B plus C
Derivation
Does past effort on A change its forward value eight versus eleven?
Compare the Feasible Portfolios
A uses four weeks for 100 units. B+C uses weeks for units: 15 more under the stated assumptions. This is modeled value, not measured impact.
Do not add incompatible real-world metrics into a precise-looking score or double-count shared benefits. Use ranges and explicit outcome/guardrail trade-offs instead.
Change 1: B Needs an Unfunded Platform
New task. B requires two additional engineer-weeks before delivering value.
Picture and change. Include prerequisite cost, timing and shared benefits. B+C now needs six weeks and is infeasible.
Check. A’s 100 beats feasible C’s 55 here; B alone offers 60 within four weeks.
Use when. Projects share dependencies or scarce skills.
Change 2: A Is Assigned Required Work
New task. A satisfies a mandatory obligation.
Picture and change. Represent its rationale fairly; agree authority, scope and capacity before proposing alternatives.
Check. Optional value cannot cancel an obligation. Saying no is not itself impact.
Use when. Priorities conflict with another owner.
Failure: Criteria Without a Decision
Interests and strategy slogans do not identify a forgone alternative, evidence or actual outcome.
Transfer Check
Why might a lower estimated-value project still be selected?
Reasoned Answer
A duty, dependency, risk, skill constraint or uncertain forecast can change feasibility or utility. Name the reason rather than hiding it inside a score.
Evidence Worksheet
Use a real recent choice, not the fictional value exercise as a personal achievement.
| Field | Record |
|---|---|
| Candidate/outcome | User population, outcome and guardrails |
| Evidence | Known facts, uncertainty and modeled versus observed impact |
| Future cost | People, time and next-best alternative; do not justify from sunk effort |
| Leverage | Technical prerequisites and team multiplier without double counting |
| Fit | Skills, owner, delegation and sustained engagement |
| Decision | What you chose/declined, with whose authority |
| Revisit | What shipped, measured outcomes and reopening evidence |
Balance delivery and longer-term investment against strategy and obligations. Two-thirds/one-third is an illustrative allocation, not a rule. Engagement informs ownership feasibility; it does not override user duties.
Check the Account
Can another person reconstruct the alternative, rationale, personal contribution and observed result? Decision rights vary by team; independence is not a universal level test.
Missing Evidence
Add missing user value, strategic rationale, ownership or a concrete trade-off. Do not invent an example or outcome.
Common follow-up
Describe a time you proposed not doing assigned work. Explain the original rationale, alternative, assigning party’s response, final decision, actual delivery and what you would change.
Sources
Related: The 5 things every applied scientist interview is testing for, senior through senior-principal ML scope.