I made these 2 versions where people must set the priority. However I personally think the first version works perfectly but my concern is that our main target are the generation Z people. Also the product I work on has aspirations to be fun.

I need to know some thoughts.


enter image description here

  • To be able to say what works better you should add some extra info. Where and why do people have to provide a priority? What type of product is it for? This could change the 'correct' answer quite a bit.
    – GWv
    Apr 4, 2017 at 12:21
  • Sorry for not coming with enough info. People will have to select the priority when they are creating an event. I suggested that the priority part to be bound with the selection date part (eg: when the date you selected for an event is in 1 week, then the priority is high by default, in 2-3 weeks is medium, etc.) The category of the product is fintech, social, crowdfunding.
    – Ciprian
    Apr 4, 2017 at 12:43
  • Can you tell us what concerns you have with Generation Z? I, for one, don't know what their properties are, or even what age range they are. Apr 4, 2017 at 12:57

3 Answers 3


I think this relates to JIRA System - in case if you have used it.

Instead of low, medium and high; what if you tag them as Low, High and Critical?. And use the symbols like:

enter image description here


Personally I think priority should be more "binary", as in it's either important or it's not. Setting priority as a spectrum makes stuff more complicated than they need to be. Having Low, Medium and High priority options, people will usually opt for the Low (which is sometimes set as default) or High. Instead, I'd have a checkbox saying This is important.

  • 1
    Without knowing what people will do with the Lo/Med/Hi info, this seems the right answer. I assume people will take some action on the High events, and that Low and Medium are normal, needing no special attention. Binary. Apr 4, 2017 at 13:04

An exclamation mark itself conveys the "Important" meaning already, so using it to denote low priority is bad idea in my opinion. So I would not use the first two.

I would not use the other two neither, because people will be scared by the important elements. Probably it is not your intent for the app to do that.

I would use:

  • something prominent for high priority, e.g.: + or ↑
  • something neutral for normal priority, e.g.: •
  • something diminished for low priority, e.g.: - or ↓

I think it is important for these symbols to correspond to each other:

  • the neutral one only should indicate that there is an option to change it, but should not get in the way too much
  • low priority should be at the opposite side of high priority.

This way you would have a set of icons like these for example: ↑ • ↓

Of course, you can go further, making the circle gray, the up arrow bold and red, and the down arrow thin and light gray.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.