Workflow prioritiser: how it works
The prioritiser compares candidate tasks on how often they recur, how long each run takes, how structured the inputs already are, and what a wrong output would cost. It produces an order, so the first project is the one most likely to work rather than the one that sounds most impressive.
( The Detail )
What this tool tells you
A high ranking means a task is a reasonable candidate, not that it is guaranteed to succeed. It does not estimate build effort, judge whether your team will adopt it, or account for a supplier or system that will not cooperate. Those constraints come from whoever knows the operation.
Using it well
The mechanics matter less than the reasoning behind them. Each question is chosen because the answer changes the recommendation, not because it pads out a score. Where an answer is uncertain, the tool is designed to say so rather than average the uncertainty away into a confident-looking number.
Nothing here replaces a conversation about your specific operation. The value is that it puts the same structured questions to every business, which makes the gaps visible quickly and gives a shared starting point for a more detailed discussion.
How to approach it
Begin with the decision rather than the tool. Name the recurring judgement this affects, the information it depends on, and the person accountable for acting on the result. That framing keeps the first build small enough to inspect and useful enough to matter.
Keep a human review point in the loop until the quality and the failure modes are understood. A system that shows its working - what it drew on, where it is uncertain, and what it deliberately left alone - is one a business can keep running after the initial build.
( Next Step )
Start small enough to review, but on a workflow important enough to show whether a better system is worth building.