A team with ten priorities has zero priorities. Nobody can hold ten things in their head at once, so they'll quietly pick their own, and it probably won't be the same one you'd have picked.
The instinct in a new role is to show ambition by taking on more: more initiatives, more visible projects, more proof that you're moving fast. The instinct that actually works is the opposite, naming the one or two things that matter enough to justify saying no to everything else.
If you can't say, without checking your notes, what your team's single top priority is right now, neither can they. A long list of priorities isn't a strategy. It's a way of avoiding the harder job of choosing.
Cutting the list isn't about doing less work overall. It's about making sure the work actually happening is the work that was supposed to happen first. The things you deliberately don't do yet are as much a decision as the ones you commit to, and saying so out loud is what makes it a decision instead of an accident.
When Steve Jobs came back to Apple in 1997, the company had over 40 products and no clear priority among them. He cut the line to four. That wasn't caution, it was the move that saved the company. A team with three real priorities will consistently outrun a team with ten, not because the ten weren't worthwhile, but because none of them ever got the full attention any one of them needed.
Ask three people on your team, separately, what they think the team's top priority is right now. If you get three different answers, that's not a communication problem, it's a focus problem.