Requirements prioritization is an important part of developing the right product in the right time. There are different ideas about which method is the best to use when prioritizing requirements. This thesis takes a closer look at five different methods and then put them into an controlled experiment, in order to find out which of the methods that would be the best method to use. The experiment was designed to find out which method yields the most accurate result, the method’s ability to scale up to many more requirements, what time it took to prioritize with the method, and finally how easy the method was to use. These four criteria combined will indicate which method is more suitable, i.e. be the best method, to use in prioritizing of requirements. The chosen methods are the well-known analytic hierarchy process, the computer algorithm binary search tree, and from the ideas of extreme programming come planning game. The fourth method is an old but well used method, the 100 points method. The last method is a new method, which combines planning game with the analytic hierarchy process. Analysis of the data from the experiment indicates that the planning game combined with analytic hierarchy process could be a good candidate. However, the result from the experiment clearly indicates that the binary search tree yields accurate result, is able to scale up and was the easiest method to use. For these three reasons the binary search tree clearly is the better method to use for prioritizing requirements

Kravprioritering är ett av de viktigaste och mest inflytelserika stegen vid tillverkning av en mjukvaruprodukt. Processen är iterativ; den sker under hela produktens agila mjukvaruutvecklingsprocess. Genom kravprioritering beslutas det om vilka krav som ska utvecklas, i vilken ordning och varför.  Målet med denna studie är att undersöka hur mjukvaruutvecklande företag gör för att kravprioritera, samt identifiera vilka prioriteringsmetoder de eventuellt använder sig av. Studiens syfte är att få en förståelse för varför en väl avvägd prioritering är viktig, vilka särskilda prioriteringsfaktorer som ger värde till en produkt och att se hur dessa faktorer är relaterade till resultatet. Syftet är även att undersöka vilka svårigheter som finns i en prioriteringsprocess, samt att skapa en översikt över några av de mest vedertagna prioriteringsmetoderna inom agil mjukvaruutveckling.  Studien utförs i samarbete med mjukvaruföretaget Monitor ERP för att analysera företagets prioriteringsprocesser som används för att utveckla deras affärssystem Monitor. Metoden som används är en kvalitativ undersökning som består av observationer av möten kring prioriteringsarbete och semi-strukturerade intervjuer. Bearbetning av insamlat material skedde genom att organisera, analysera och sammanställa resultat enligt begrepp och kategorier som framkom utifrån litteraturstudien. Resultatet redovisar arbetsprocesser, gemensamma mål, prioriteringsaspekter och utmaningar i prioriteringsarbetet hos Monitor ERP. En väl avvägd prioritering visade sig vara viktigt för att kunna leverera rätt funktionalitet i tid, för att kunna ge trovärdiga estimeringar om utvecklingen och det i sin tur leder till att kunder får förtroende för både produkten och företaget. En rad olika prioriteringsfaktorer som ger värde till programvaran Monitor identifierades, varav många bidrar till att öka kundnöjdheten och kvaliteten på produkten. Monitor ERP använder inte några särskilda prioriteringsmetoder, utan utvecklingsfilosofin Minimum Viable Product används som grund till deras prioriteringsval. Under prioriteringsarbetet upplevdes utmaningar såsom begränsade resurser, oförutsägbara uppgifter, svårigheter med tidsestimering och en utmaning i balansen mellan kundnytta och kundfokus. / Prioritizing requirements is one of the most important and influential steps in the creation of a software product. The process is iterative; it takes place during the entire agile software development. Through prioritizing requirements, it is decided which requirements are to be developed, in which order, and why.  The aim of this study is to investigate how companies that design software prioritize requirements and to identify which prioritization methods they might use during this process. The purpose of this study is to gain an understanding for why a well-balanced prioritization is important, which specific prioritization factors give value to a product, as well as identifying how these factors are related to the result. The purpose is also to investigate the difficulties that exist in a prioritization process, and to create an overview of some of the most used prioritization methods in agile software development.  This study is conducted in collaboration with the software company Monitor ERP in order to analyze the company's prioritization processes used to develop their business management system Monitor. The method used is a qualitative study that consists of observations of meetings about prioritization processes, and semi-structured interviews. Processing of collected material was done by organizing, analyzing, and compiling results according to concepts and categories that emerged from the literature study. The results documents work processes, common goals, prioritization aspects and challenges in the requirements prioritization at Monitor ERP.  A well-balanced prioritization proved to be important to be able to deliver the right functionality on time and to be able to provide dependable estimates of development, which in turn leads to customers gaining confidence in both the product and the company. A number of prioritization factors that give value to the Monitor software were identified, many of which contribute to increasing customer satisfaction and product quality. Monitor ERP does not use any specific prioritization methods, but the development philosophy Minimum Viable Product is used as a basis for their prioritization choices. During the prioritization process, challenges such as limited resources, unpredictable tasks, difficulties with time estimation, and a challenge in balancing customer value and customer focus were experienced.