If more than 20% of items are top priority…

When This Fires

• During backlog reviews when priority distribution seems off
• When the team can't identify "the most important thing" because too many things are marked critical
• After a period of scope or demand increase that inflated priority labels
• Any time someone says "everything is critical" as a genuine observation, not a complaint

Common Failure Mode

Treating priority inflation as an accurate reflection of reality: "We really DO have this many critical items." Maybe — but if so, the priority system isn't helping you differentiate. A system where 40% of items are "critical" provides the same actionable information as a system with no priority labels at all. The response is either tightening the definition or acknowledging that the current capacity is insufficient for the actual critical load (a different problem requiring different interventions — see When commitments exceed capacity, only three fixes work).

The Protocol

During backlog review: (1) Count items in the highest priority tier as a percentage of total backlog. (2) If ≤20% → priority system is calibrated. The top tier genuinely differentiates the vital few. (3) If >20% → priority inflation detected. Tighten the definition: raise the threshold for the top tier until ≤20% of items qualify. Items that were previously "critical" under the loose definition become "high" — they're important but not the vital few. (4) Re-evaluate quarterly, as conditions change and definitions need periodic recalibration.