Turning competing priorities into explicit choices

01 · Problem

The problem behind the problem

Roadmaps from multiple communities competed for capacity and relied on legacy systems. Decisions had to balance customer, operation, risk and return — without turning strategy into an endless list of initiatives.

02 · Decisions

How I turned context into action

• Built a portfolio management model with explicit criteria for value, cost, risk, dependencies and trade-offs (cost of delay, ROI, RAROC and cost to serve).
• Connected service data, Central Bank complaints, surveys and internal indicators into a customer-pain score.
• Facilitated executive forums and strategy workshops with directors, superintendents and hundreds of PMs to make choices and trade-offs visible.
• Redesigned the portfolio review ritual (QBR) to bring strategy, roadmap and execution closer together.

03 · Metrics

Results and observed signals

• Financial value of prioritized initiatives from R$ 25 million to R$ 65 million. How it was measured: Sum of the business value of initiatives after prioritization by value, cost, risk and dependencies.
• Adherence between planned and delivered roadmap from 20% to 65%. How it was measured: Planned versus delivered across the portfolio; direction changes dropped from 35% to 15%.
• Cross-team initiative lead time reduced from 120 to 43 days. How it was measured: Critical modernization initiatives (Iti → Super App migration and VQ → NPC card platform).
• Upheld Central Bank complaints reduced from 80k to 69k (−14%). How it was measured: Customer-pain score (NPS, Central Bank, surveys and internal data), focused on limits and fraud.