McFadyen Digital  ·  AI Enablement

Use-Case Prioritizer

Move the weights, change a score, and watch the ranking and the 2×2 re-form. Forty candidates from the discovery register, scored on the framework we published on 6 August. Every criterion shows the scoring anchor behind the number.

Baseline v1.1 Register as at 2 September 2026
Try a view

Value against ease

Both axes run 1 to 5. The lines sit at 3.00, the cut the framework uses. Nothing is rounded before it is placed.

What your weights changed

0Above both lines
0Recommend now

Where the forty sit

Crossed into the quick-win box

    Dropped out of it

      Biggest rank moves

        Ranked candidates

        Every 1–5 cell is editable. Click a row for the case, the conditions and the scoring anchors. Column headers sort.

        The framework does not produce a single ranked list on purpose. A composite would sit zone pricing — high value, not our work, a multi-quarter programme — next to a permissions change. The ranking here is a conversation aid; the quadrant, the evidence grade and the tier are the instrument.

        Tier follows from the score, not the other way round. Above both lines with evidence A or B is Recommend now; above both lines on a single-source assertion is Recommend pending evidence, because nothing graded C enters Tier 1. High value and low ease is a bigger bet. Out of scope, client-owned, superseded and enabler override the box they land in.

        Sixteen of the forty are graded C — a single source, our own inference, or a hypothesis with no number behind it. The instrument is not meant to survive contact with the exports unchanged. When the numbers land, the scores move, and this tool is where you will see what they move.