This repository contains the scoring model used to prioritize the migration sequence of 500+ web pages from a legacy monolithic CMS to a modern composable architecture.
Rather than migrating pages arbitrarily — or by whoever lobbied loudest — a data-driven composite scoring framework was built to objectively rank page groups across value, complexity, and momentum dimensions. The model was built collaboratively: product, UX, engineering, and analytics each contributed scores within their domain, and the output drove the official migration wave sequencing plan.
📄 Read the full methodology → 📊 Download the scoring model →
Quantitative prioritization under complexity — With 500+ pages, 5 lines of business, and competing stakeholder priorities, "gut feel" sequencing would have produced a politically charged, inefficient migration order. This model replaced that process with a transparent, agreed-upon framework — and shows how I approach prioritization problems that can't be solved with a simple 2×2.
Weighted composite scoring design — The model scores pages across 8 dimensions grouped into 3 composite scores (Value, Complexity, Momentum), each with explicit weights reflecting strategic tradeoffs. Component Score (25%) outweighs SEO Score (5%) because reusable components accelerate the broader migration — not just the pages they appear on. The weighting choices are documented and defensible, not arbitrary.
Intentional inversion: Complexity scoring — Complexity uses an inverted scale (5 = least complex, 1 = most complex), so highly complex pages score lower and migrate later. This prevents the team from tackling the hardest pages first and stalling early momentum. It's a small design choice with significant sequencing implications.
Cross-functional input as a process design problem — Getting consistent 1–5 scores from product, UX, engineering, and analytics requires clear rubric definitions and a structured scoring exercise. The methodology documents how that was operationalized — ensuring scores were comparable across teams, not just collected independently.
Transparency as a stakeholder management tool — Publishing the scoring methodology replaced political lobbying with a shared framework. Teams could see exactly why their pages were sequenced where they were — and what would need to change for a page to move up in priority. This is prioritization as communication, not just calculation.
| Product | Enterprise CMS Platform Migration (500+ pages) |
| Document Type | Prioritization Scoring Model |
| Status | Completed |
| Context | FinTech — Legacy Monolithic CMS → Modern Composable Stack |
| Artifact | Description |
|---|---|
| PRD: Enterprise CMS Platform Migration | Full PRD for the migration initiative this model supported |