PUBS scoring model: The B2B2C Prioritization Framework

What to focus on when customers, end users, and partners are all important, and current frameworks fall short.

***Click here to learn how to cite this framework.***

Abstract

​​Prioritization decisions in the new-age B2B2C (Business-to-Business-to-Consumer) product ecosystems are no longer linear. Traditional prioritization models are geared towards single-customer (B2B) or single-user (B2C) models. They do not take into consideration the three-party trade-offs among businesses, end users, and partners.

This article presents the PUBS scoring model — a B2B2C Prioritization Framework, a decision-making framework aimed at assisting product leaders in assessing initiatives within multi-stakeholder environments.

Product prioritization is hard.

Product prioritization is hard since Product Managers are deciding what not to build with vague and incomplete information in ambiguous situations. Customer feedback tends to be noisy and biased; that is, we tend to only focus on the most vocal users. Metrics are not completely independent and are hard to measure with accuracy. Meanwhile, there is never enough engineering capacity, and teams must work under constraints. Even with one type of customer, the process of prioritization is not easy.

Product prioritization in B2B2C is harder.

B2B2C products have many types of customers at the same time. The product is usually paid for by a business, used by an end user on an everyday basis, and distributed, implemented, or scaled by a partner or platform. All these groups differ in the value they associate with outcomes and success measures. Consequently, the feature that works wonders with one group can accidentally cause friction or decrease the value to another. It is the interdependence that complicates prioritization to a great extent in B2B2C products.

Examples of B2B2C

Some great examples of B2B2C are:

Stripe: Developers (business partners) implement Stripe in their websites to handle payment; consumers use it to make transactions in a secure way.

Airbnb: Hosts list their properties to rent; Guests book and stay in the properties with help from Airbnb’s platform.

GoodRx: Pharmacies offer pricing information, and GoodRx coupons are accepted. Consumers use the coupons to receive discounts on drugs.

Uber: Drivers register to provide rides through the site; riders can access a ride through the application.

Traditional frameworks assume one primary customer

Frameworks such as **RICE, [MoSCoW](https://www.productplan.com/glossary/moscow-prioritization/), and [WSJF](https://www.productplan.com/glossary/weighted-shortest-job-first/)** have been widely used because they provide structure and discipline to prioritization. However, they were designed for a one-to-one recipient environment: usually that of either the end user (B2C) or the buying organization (B2B). In B2B2C models, such an assumption is no longer true.

In B2B2C ecosystems, value is created within interdependent stakeholders: partners, end users, and businesses. A framework that ranks highly on one group may diminish value or even present risk to a different group. Traditional frameworks are not designed to explicitly model these cross-stakeholder dependencies.

• RICE aggregates reach and the impact into the single user-centric score known as the RICE score, obscuring situations where an initiative has benefits for end users but hurts the partner economics or enterprise adoption.
• MoSCoW categorizes urgency without considering ecosystem leverage, so that “Must-have” items are locally important but seldom result in global misalignment.
• WSJF is optimizing for economic efficiency for one value stream, but is challenged when the delay cost or value of the job is unequal for different stakeholders with different power/incentives.

As a result, these frameworks often make locally optimal but systemically suboptimal decisions in the context of B2B2C. Teams may focus on features that have a high impact in isolation, but fail to unlock scale, distribution, or long-term sustainability within the ecosystem as a whole. The limitation is not a flaw of the frameworks in any way. It is a disparity between their underlying assumptions and the structural complexity of the multifaceted product models.

The Framework: How the B2B2C Prioritization Model Works

Figure 1: The PUBS Scoring Model Template

Figma Template Link: https://www.figma.com/community/file/1498095456994669016

The PUBS Scoring Model helps product teams in B2B2C environments prioritize initiatives by balancing the needs of Partners, Users, the Business, and Scalability. It gives a clear, structured way to evaluate ideas based on real impact, not just gut feeling.

Here’s what each letter stands for:

P — Partner Enablement Impact

How much will this initiative help partners be more successful, onboard faster, or grow?

U — User Value Impact

How much will it enhance the experience, satisfaction, or loyalty of end-users?

B — Business Outcome Impact

How significant will it be in driving core business goals such as revenue, retention, or engagement?

S — Scale Potential

How easy is this solution to scale to a relatively large number of partners and users, without requiring heavy customization?

Example: Putting the Framework into Practice

In Figure 2, you can see 4 initiatives: Fast Onboarding API, New Loyalty Program, UX Polish for App & Partner Analytics Dashboard. The weights used for Partner Impact, User Impact, Business Impact & Potential to scale are 1.5, 1, 1.2, and 1.3 respectively. Different weights suggest that one type of user is more important than the other. But assigning weights is not compulsory. The scores have been calculated with and without weights to show the flexibility of the framework. The first on the score list would be the initiative with the highest score, which is “Fast Onboarding API” in this case, with a score of 21.7, which has been marked with a green thumb to indicate the most important chosen initiative.

Figure 2: Applying The PUBS Scoring Model

When to Use This Framework (and When Not To)

This framework is most appropriate for products that operate within multi-stakeholder ecosystems (B2B2C), where value is created by business buyers, end users, and partners, collectively at scale. It is also a good fit for platforms and B2B products that have end-user exposure as well as enterprise buyers. In these environments, balancing competing incentives in the form of prioritization decisions is required, and making these trade-off decisions explicit is crucial.

The framework does not work as well for pure B2C products, where there is usually just one main customer and fewer ecosystem dependencies. It is also not ideal for early-stage MVPs without partners, platforms, or distribution channels in place, as the added structure may create unnecessary complexity before stakeholder relationships are fully formed.

How to Cite or Reference This Framework

If you reference or teach this framework, please cite it as:

Rohan Paliwal (April 2025). Template for B2B2C Prioritization — PUBS Scoring Model **https://www.figma.com/community/file/1498095456994669016**

You are welcome to use the framework in teaching, presentations, and practice with attribution. If you would like to deep-dive into the B2B2C world, I teach this framework and other concepts in more detail here on Udemy.