ISSUE PRIORITISATION MATRIX
Definition/Purpose: A Prioritisation Matrix is a useful technique to identify which problems are the most important to work on solving first. The Matrix helps you rank problems or issues generated through brainstorming, using weighted criteria that are important to your project and/or organisation. A prioritisation matrix is useful in the Ideas generation and planning phases of a project when you need to prioritise problems, or to achieve consensus about an issue or proposed solution. An issues prioritisation matrix is also helpful in sharing with your sponsor and others how final choices were made.
Instructions:
- Conduct a brainstorming session with the group to identify issues/problems/solutions relevant to your service.
- Develop criteria that are important for the listed issues/problems/solutions that were generated from your team or brainstorming session. Examples of typical criteria include:
- Frequency: How frequent is the problem? Does it occur often or only on rare occasions?
- Importance: From the point of view of the users, what are the most important problems? What are the problems that you want to resolve?
- Cost
- Time
- Potential Benefits
- Ease of Implementation
- Feasibility: How realistic is it that we can resolve the problem? Will it be easy or difficult?
- You can choose other criteria if they better fit the situation you are discussing.
- List criteria on flipchart or whiteboard. Narrow criteria to 10 or fewer through consensus or multi-voting approach. Multi-voting steps:
- Count number of criteria listed and divide by 3.
- Each participant has this number of votes from step 2 to vote for criteria they consider important.
- Count votes. Eliminate any criteria with < 2 votes. With teams > 5 participants- you may want to eliminate criteria with 3-4 votes.
- Repeat process until a manageable number of items are achieved (2-6).
- Weight Criteria- each participant allocates a single point (1.0) between the criteria. Compute a composite score by adding up scores from all members for a particular criteria. (see example below).
Weight Criteria Example
Criteria / Team Participant A / Team Participant B / Team Participant C / Composite ScoreA. Frequency / 0.5 / 0.4 / 0.9
B. Importance / 0.2 / 0.2 / 0.3 / 0.7
C. Feasibility / 0.3 / 0.2 / 0.3 / 0.8
D.Cost / 0.6 / 0.6
Total / 1.0 / 1.0 / 1.0 / 3.0
- Each participant then ranks the items against the established criteria based on a selected scoring system. An example of a scoring system is noted below.
Possible Scoring System:
Scoring System:1- Very low
2- Low
3- Medium
4- Fairly High
5- Very High
- Multiply the ranking for each item completed in step 5 by the criteria weight. High scores indicate the best options.
Prioritisation Matrix (for each participant to complete)
Issue/ Problem/Solution / Frequency .9 / Importance .7 / Feasibility .8 / Cost
.6 / Total Points
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
- Add all the participant’s scores together for each item to get group consensus. High scores indicate the best options.
Overall Score (group score for comparison)
Issue/ Problem/Solution / Participant 1 / Participant
2 / Participant 3 / Total Points
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
Source: Department of Health and Human Resources Tasmania
Example: Wound Care Service
- Issues Identified that need to be addressed. Which ones should be given priority?
- Wound care dressing package has changed
- Wound care admissions to the ED have increased by 15%
- There is a 3% increase in the cost of consumable deliverables
- The contract with the main customer expires in 2 months
- Increased presentation of staph infections
- New standards of care for hospital acquired pressure injuries
- And 3. Criteria identified and voted to ensure no more than 10
- Patient outcomes
- Importance
- Feasibility
- Cost
- Criteria weighted
Weight Criteria Example
Criteria / Team Participant A / Team Participant B / Team Participant C / Composite ScoreA. Patient outcomes / .5 / .4 / .9
B. Importance / .2 / .2 / .3 / .7
C. Ease of changing / .3 / .2 / .3 / .8
D.Cost implications / .6 / .6
Total / 1. / 1. / 1. / 3.0
- Each participant then ranks the items against the established criteria based on a selected scoring system. An example of a scoring system is noted below.
Possible Scoring System:
Scoring System:1- Very low
2- Low
3- Medium
4- Fairly High
5- Very High
Prioritisation Matrix (for each participant to complete)
Issue / Patient outcomes .9 / Ease of changing .8 / Importance .7 / Cost implications.6 / Total Points
(Participant 1)
Wound care dressing package has changed / 1 / 1 / 1 / 1 / *3.0
Wound care admissions to the ED have increased by 15% / 5 / 1 / 5 / 5 / 11.8
There is a 3% increase in the cost of consumable deliverables / 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 4.3
The contract with the main customer expires in 2 months / 2 / 5 / 5 / 2 / 10.5
Increased presentation of staph infections / 5 / 1 / 5 / 5 / 11.8
New standards of care for hospital acquired pressure injuries / 5 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 14.2
- Multiply the ranking for each item completed in step 5 by the criteria weight. High scores indicate the best options (see above).
*example of working from line 1in table above (1 x 0.9) + (1 x 0.8) + (1 x 0.7) + (1 x 0.6) = 3.0
- Add all the participant’s scores together for each item to get group consensus. High scores indicate the highest priority issues to address (or the best options if you are comparing solutions).
Overall Score (group score for comparison)
Issue / Participant 1 / Participant2 / Participant 3 / Total Points / Ranking
(1highest priority)
Wound care dressing package has changed / 3.0 / 2.1 / 3.0 / 8.1 / 6
Wound care admissions to the ED have increased by 15% / 11.8 / 10 / 11.2 / 33 / 3
There is a 3% increase in the cost of consumable deliverables / 4.3 / 3.8 / 4.1 / 12.2 / 5
The contract with the main customer expires in 2 months / 10.5 / 11 / 10 / 31.5 / 4
Increased presentation of staph infections / 11.8 / 12.1 / 10.9 / 34.8 / 2
New standards of care for hospital acquired pressure injuries / 14.2 / 15 / 14.2 / 43.4 / 1
Reviewed October 2017 Page 1 of 5