R12 · R06 · R02 · R03 · R01 · R10
Interactive Case Study
Fictional demonstration · JX Research Prioritizer · V6
VaultX: Turning 12 Competing Research
Requests Into One Defensible
Investment Portfolio
JX Lab transformed VaultX’s overwhelming research backlog into a clear, actionable strategy for a 70-year vault-building security company.
12Competing Requests
$297KSubmitted Demand
2,295Requested Hours
$150K / 1,200Selected Budget / Hours
Active Configuration
Product & UX Research
Additional organizational context weights will be defined and validated in later product phases.
The IMPACT Prioritization Framework
Adjust the weights to explore research-investment attractiveness. Recommendations remain governed by documented decision gates.
Resource Constraints
Balance demand with available capacity.
$80K$200K
700 hours1,600 hours
VaultX Baseline
12-request decision map
IMPACT scores change with valid weights. Row order, recommendations and allocations remain tied to the documented baseline plan; changing a score does not automatically fund or defer a study.
This sandbox calculates scores from summarized dimension ratings. The full case study records the original 18-variable assessment, so its scores may differ slightly.
| ID | Request | IMPACT score | Action | Evidence | Stress-tested allocation |
|---|
Portfolio Outcome
Clear, Actionable Research Portfolio
$297K / 2,295h requested → $138K / 1,060h maximum planned
R07 stage-gated after R06
True contingency
If R06 does not clear the digital-security gate, the R07 reserve is released, producing $34K and 300 hours available for reprioritization.
Simulation Behavior
Calculated where canonical. Explicit where judgment is required.
Recommendation Reasoning
Why the baseline plan makes these choices
These explanations come from the final VaultX case study. They describe the original decisions and remain fixed while you explore the sliders.
R12 · D2C pricing + packagingProceed
Qualitative and behavioral evidence shows pricing friction, but FY27 pricing architecture remains unresolved. The decision is commercially consequential and sufficiently defined to proceed.
Focus the study on starting-price presentation, bundles, installation pricing and deposit or commitment structure. The plan commits $38K / 275h.
Source: Evidence landscape and Priority cluster D2C execution in the full case study.
R06 · Digital-security opportunityModify
The opportunity is valuable, but willingness-to-pay research is premature before VaultX defines a concrete proposition. Narrow the work to opportunity definition first.
The plan commits $24K / 170h to assess whether a viable digital-security opportunity exists before investing in downstream trust research.
Source: Recommendation gates and Priority cluster Digital security in the full case study.
R07 · Secure-recovery trustReserve after R06
Trust requirements depend on R06 identifying a viable proposition or use case. Funding both questions simultaneously would ignore that dependency.
Protect $22K / 160h until R06 clears the gate. If the opportunity fails, release the reserve and reconsider other work using current evidence.
Source: Portfolio allocation and Priority cluster Digital security in the full case study.
R04 · Post-purchase handoffUse existing evidence
Recent purchaser interviews, support evidence and satisfaction research already converge on the major handoff failures. New primary research would add little to the current decision.
Synthesize that evidence and act on the failures. The plan allocates $0 to another study; the underlying customer problem still matters.
Source: Evidence landscape and What not to fund now in the full case study.
Want the full reasoning?
Review the evidence landscape, all 12 research requests, recommendation logic, portfolio allocation and methodology.
Download the Full Case StudyHave a research backlog of your own?
Turn competing requests, existing evidence and limited capacity into a defensible research investment portfolio.
Request a Prioritization Pilot