Feature Value Planning

Position in HORIZON workflow: v0.3 Market Moat Analysis → v0.3 Feature Value Planning → v0.4 User Journeys

Features are the unit of value. Every feature must trace back to why it exists (outcome, moat, competitive position, or pricing tier).

Feature Classification Framework

| Type | Definition | Strategic Purpose | Evidence Required | |------|------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Moat | Builds/defends competitive advantage | Supports BR- moat rule | High (CFD- proving differentiation) | | Outcome | Directly drives success metric | Tied to KPI- entry | High (KPI- link mandatory) | | Parity | Matches competitor baseline | From Competitive Landscape | Medium (CFD- competitor evidence) | | Delta | Differentiation from competitors | Our advantage over market | High (CFD- gap evidence) | | Tier | Differentiates pricing packages | From Pricing BR- | Medium (BR- tier assignment) | | Table Stakes | Expected but not differentiating | Industry standard | Low (common knowledge) |

Rule: P0 features require Moat, Outcome, or Delta classification. Table Stakes alone cannot justify P0.

Product Type × Feature Strategy

Feature focus varies by product type (from v0.2 classification):

| Product Type | Primary Focus | Parity Approach | Delta Approach | |--------------|---------------|-----------------|----------------| | Fast Follow | Parity + focused delta | 1:1 critical feature match | Single compelling improvement | | Innovation | Moat-building features | Minimal (new category) | Core differentiation IS the product | | Slice | Segment-specific features | Partial (niche needs differ) | Deep fit for underserved segment |

Fast Follow Constraint

BR-FEA-PARITY-FIRST: No delta features until parity features complete. Users compare to incumbent first.

Innovation Pattern

Moat features = 60%+ of scope. Table stakes minimized. Delta is the entire value proposition.

Slice Pattern

80/20 rule: Match 20% of incumbent features that serve 80% of niche use cases. Delta = niche-specific depth.

Priority Tier Criteria

| Tier | Criteria | Evidence Threshold | |------|----------|-------------------| | P0 — Must Have | Blocks launch without it; tied to primary KPI- or moat BR- | CFD- proof + KPI-/BR- link | | P1 — Should Have | Meaningfully improves outcome; supports tier differentiation | CFD- user signal | | P2 — Nice to Have | Enhances experience; no direct KPI impact | Reasonable assumption OK | | P3 — Defer/Cut | Scope creep signal; can add post-launch | None (remove from scope) |

Kill criterion: If >40% of features are P2/P3, scope is bloated. Re-evaluate.

FEA- Output Template

Create FEA- entries in this format:

FEA-XXX: [Feature Name]
Type: [Moat | Outcome | Parity | Delta | Tier | Table Stakes]
Priority: [P0 | P1 | P2 | P3]
Description: [What the feature does — user-facing capability]
Outcome Link: [KPI-XXX this supports, or "N/A"]
Moat Link: [BR-XXX moat rule this supports, or "N/A"]
Pricing Link: [BR-XXX tier this belongs to, or "All tiers"]
Competitor Comparison: [Parity with X | Delta vs X | Unique | Table stakes]
Validation: [CFD-XXX evidence, or validation method]
Acceptance Criteria: [Testable condition for "done"]

Example entries:

FEA-001: One-Click Scheduling
Type: Parity
Priority: P0
Description: Schedule meetings with single click from availability view
Outcome Link: KPI-002 (activation rate)
Moat Link: N/A
Pricing Link: All tiers
Competitor Comparison: Parity with Calendly
Validation: CFD-012 (competitor feature audit)
Acceptance Criteria: User completes scheduling in ≤3 clicks

FEA-002: Offline Mode
Type: Delta
Priority: P0
Description: Full functionality without internet connection
Outcome Link: KPI-001 (TTFV for field users)
Moat Link: BR-012 (moat: works anywhere)
Pricing Link: BR-045 (Pro tier differentiator)
Competitor Comparison: Delta vs Notion (requires connection)
Validation: CFD-018 (user interviews: connectivity complaints)
Acceptance Criteria: All core features function with 0 connectivity for 24h

BR-FEA- Governance Rules

Create governance rules for feature decisions:

BR-FEA-XXX: [Rule Name]
Type: [Scope Protection | Prioritization Rule | Validation Gate]
Rule: [Constraint statement]
Rationale: [Why this rule exists]
Enforcement: [When/how applied]

Standard rules to establish:

• BR-FEA-001: Outcome Link Required — P0/P1 features must link to KPI- entry
• BR-FEA-002: Validation Before Build — P0 features require CFD- evidence before development
• BR-FEA-003: Scope Freeze Gate — Feature list locked after v0.4; changes require EPIC

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

| Anti-Pattern | Signal | Fix | |--------------|--------|-----| | Feature creep | P2/P3 > 40% of scope | Cut ruthlessly; defer to backlog | | Implementation masquerading as feature | "Use Redis caching" | Reframe as user outcome | | Orphaned features | No KPI-, BR-, or CFD- link | Add traceability or cut | | Assumption-based priority | "Users will love this" | Require CFD- evidence | | Parity inflation | Everything is "parity" | Challenge: is competitor feature actually used? | | Delta without moat | Delta feature easy to copy | Tie to defensible BR- moat |

Downstream Connections

FEA- entries feed into:

| Consumer | What It Uses | Example | |----------|--------------|---------| | v0.4 User Journeys | Features become journey steps | UJ-001 uses FEA-001, FEA-003 | | v0.5 Red Team | Feature risk assessment | "FEA-002 has technical risk" | | v0.7 Build Execution | EPIC scope definition | EPIC-01 delivers FEA-001–005 | | v0.9 GTM | Feature-based messaging | "Launch with FEA-002 (delta)" |

Detailed References

• Good/bad examples: See references/examples.md
• FEA- entry template: See assets/fea.md
• Competitive feature matrix: See assets/competitive-feature-matrix.md