Many prioritization frameworks for high-impact projects overlook highly tractable but slightly less "important" opportunities. Traditional methods often focus first on importance, then feasibility, potentially missing projects where ease of execution could lead to outsized impact. This gap is particularly relevant in domains like global catastrophic risk reduction, scientific research, and social impact, where marginal efforts can yield significant results.

A New Approach to Prioritization

One way to address this gap is by reversing the conventional prioritization sequence: first identifying the most tractable projects (those with the lowest barriers to execution) and then selecting the most important ones from that subset. This ensures high-reward, low-effort opportunities aren’t missed due to rigid hierarchical filtering. The method could involve:

• Tractability Filter: Listing projects ranked by feasibility (e.g., time, cost, expertise required).
• Importance Filter: Selecting the highest-impact projects from the most tractable subset.
• Secondary Criteria: Applying additional filters (e.g., neglectedness, personal fit) if needed.

Who Benefits and Why

This approach could be valuable for:

• Impact-driven individuals/organizations: Researchers, philanthropists, and policymakers seeking to maximize ROI on limited resources.
• Early-stage innovators: Entrepreneurs or scientists looking for "low-hanging fruit" in high-impact domains.
• Grantmakers: Foundations aiming to allocate funds efficiently to scalable, actionable projects.

Stakeholders are incentivized by the promise of faster, more practical solutions to pressing problems, with funders particularly interested in capital efficiency.

Execution and Comparison

A lightweight rubric or scorecard could serve as an MVP, ranking projects by tractability and importance. If validated, this might evolve into a digital tool or workshop format. Compared to existing frameworks like 80,000 Hours’ (which prioritizes importance first) or OMEGA’s (which uses weighted scoring), this approach explicitly surfaces "quick wins" by filtering for tractability upfront. It complements rather than replaces existing tools, offering a distinct heuristic for resource-constrained actors.

Key challenges include defining tractability objectively and avoiding overemphasis on short-term wins, but these could be mitigated with domain-specific metrics and a "long-term multiplier" factor. The approach’s adaptability and methodological novelty make it a compelling addition to the prioritization toolkit.