Priority matrix
Within the framework of networked thinking, a priority matrix enables the determination of good points of intervention in a problem-relevant structure of cause-effect relationships based on various characteristics that can be freely selected and, if necessary, weighted differently.
use
The use of the priority matrix continues the idea of the influence matrix consistently and implements the multi-criteria decision theory in concrete terms: All variables considered are placed in a standardized ranking with regard to each characteristic used and, across all rankings, it is determined which variables have the greatest possible degree of characteristic fulfillment and therefore the represent the best possible intervention points in the problem situation.
| over | standard. | Term | standard. | Lenk | standard. | Target % | standard. | Pri | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V1 | 2 | 0.2 | 2 | 0.2 | 0 | - | - | - | - | |
| V2 | 2 | 0.2 | 3 | 0.3 | 3 | 0.3 | 0.8 | 0.08 | 2 | |
| V3 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| V4 | 5 | 0.5 | 3 | 0.3 | 2 | 0.2 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | |
| V5 | 0 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| V6 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 0.03 | 3 | |
| V7 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| V8 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Priority matrix with exemplary data | ||||||||||
construction
The priority matrix is a two-dimensional matrix in which the individual variables of the problem situation are noted in the rows, just like in the influence matrix . The characteristics that are used to derive intervention points are entered in the columns. Mostly these are: Strong influence on the problem structure ( over , understood as output surplus), change period ( V term , understood as change period) and controllability ( steering , understood as the possibility of direct access). For each of these characteristics, values between 0 (not at all) and 3 (very strong) are entered for each variable and the values are normalized in a separate column ( norm. ).
The priority matrix is evaluated in the column Degree of target achievement ( target% ) for each variable across all standardized values. The rankings of the standardized degrees of target achievement are then viewed as a priority with regard to the leverage effect of individual problem variables.
In the example shown, V4 of all variables proves to be the best possible point of intervention in the problem structure, followed by V2 . V4 shows the best results across all characteristics and V2 has the best controllability. V6 is still suitable as a lever for measures, but it falls significantly behind V4 and V2. All other variables do not provide any way of solving the problem.
Use and application
Working with the priority matrix can be implemented using an Excel table, whereby the individual features can also be weighted differently if necessary. In continuation of the influence matrix, the priority matrix is part of the system-oriented management, which consists of a metatheoretical anchoring, a theoretical justification and a practical implementation with concrete tools.
The priority matrix can be used by individuals and groups, although the time required in the latter case is significantly greater. Realistic for a small group is about 2 hours with 10 variables. For more complex tasks, a whole day with several runs can be necessary.
The information is given based on plausibility considerations in the value range of 0, 1, 2 and 3. As with all rating scales with at least four distinguishable values, it is assumed that the users implicitly assume an interval scaling.
literature
- Peter Gomez , Gilbert Probst : The practice of holistic problem solving. Haupt, Bern 2009.
- Falko Wilms : Decision-making in networked thinking. In: M. Lehner, Falko EP Wilms: Problem situations as a structure of effects. Wissenschaftliche Verlag Berlin, Berlin 2001, pp. 53–73.
Individual evidence
- ^ M. Zeleny .: Multiple Criteria Decision Making. New York et al. 1982, p. 162 ff.
- Jump up ↑ JS Dyer, PC Fishbum, et al .: Multiple Criteria Decision Making, Multiatributive Utility Theory: The next ten years. In: Management Science. vol. 38, No. 5, May 1992, pp. 645-654.
- ↑ JR Doyle: Multiattribute Choice for the lazy Decision Maker: Let the Alternatives Decide! In: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. vol. 62, No O1 1995, pp. 98-100.
- ↑ Falko EP Wilms: System-oriented management. Vahlen, Munich 2001, ISBN 3-8006-2389-7 .
- ↑ Horst O. Mayer: Interview and written questionnaire. 5. revised u. exp. Ed., Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich / Vienna 2009, p. 83.