remote, fast, accurate, distributed team decisions
Post on 20-Sep-2014
654 views
DESCRIPTION
A new and unique tool and service. Helps remote teams spread across a country or the World to come to a consensus decision on relative priorities very quickly. Up to 10 team members or sub-groups can prioritise up to 7 projects/areas. Each team member inputs their views by a simple point and click method during a 30 minute one-on-one webcall with specialists. No data entry required from team. A detailed and highly accurate model is produced of the team view, taking every team members input into account. Multiple outputs are generated in a report and team presentation via a webcast the next day. What-if models and different scenarios can then be tried out to tune the team choices.TRANSCRIPT
1
SmartWayToDecide©
Remote, fast, accurate, distributed
team decisionshttp://Smartwaytodoitlimited.squarespace.com
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 2
New way (up to 10x cheaper real cost)
Old way (takes time / expensive real cost)
15 Minutes
15 Minutes
15 Minutes
15 Minutes
15 Minutes
½ day facilitated meetingSmartwaytodoit
•Arranged in days•30 Minute sponsor call•15 Minute member sessions
Report
Report
What-If?models
•Finding common day out in all diaries•Travel to same location•Hotels•Facilities•Lost time of 5-10 productive workdays•Expensive facilitator•Report writing
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 3
What is SmartWayToDecide© ?
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 4
Client problem statement How do I get a consensus that takes every member input
accurately?
Over a team of up to 10 differing people or sub-groups?
On what they think are their priorities and views?
For up to 7 different options, projects, bids, proposals, actions, choices?
Without having everyone in the same room, region, country, time-zone?
At the same time?
In a couple of days?
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 5
Client benefits of SmartWayToDecide©
Maximum result for minimum effort
Maximum value for lower cost than full face-to-face meeting
Very simple team inputs (point and click)
Very accurate result
Comprehensive and detailed outputs that can drive actions
Understand differing degree of support for results across the team
Rapid What-If? Scenarios in seconds
Model can be retained and reworked
Team members in any location
Team members can choose time of their input
Less than 1 hour for sponsor
Less than 30 minutes for team members
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 6
How does SmartWayToDecide© work?
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 7
Sponsor completes online forms 1 and 2
We assign contract number and create
detailed email text for Sponsor
Sponsor sends email to all team
member
Team members complete form 3
We do detailed analysis and produce full report (and receive
payment)
Review results with Sponsor
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 8
Sponsor inputs name and scope for up to 7 options for team (in local language) using Form1 on website
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 9
Sponsor inputs names of team using Form2 on website
10
Members inputs for comparisons on Form3 on website...
SmartWayToDecide© 2010
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 11
Unique focus on project ratings and team member opinions
The tool has a detailed mathematical model that takes each member view into account in a precise way with just a point-and-click input
Team members can be shown how their individual input affects the final answer. They will not be able to say their input did not count
Uniquely, the team dynamics are also taken into account. Those that have high ratings from other team members, can have a bigger influence on the final answer
The sponsor can see how each of the team members are clustered near or far from the final result and work on gaining better convergence
It is not just about the team view but also working towards a better team support to go forward
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 12
What SmartWayToDecide© is not!
This is a tool to accurately measure the views using the knowledge, experience and feelings of the team
It is not an Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). They look at a detailed set of criteria, factors, inputs, relationships etc. To build a logical view of the underlying structures in opportunities and potential priorities. AHP often takes more time, input and often facilitation by consultants and is extremely useful for a detailed and logical analysis
Smartwaytodecide can be used before embarking on an AHP study and can be used after AHP to get to what the team believes should be done with all the logical inputs, where to look, how they are clustered around the task/outcome (or not!)
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 13
Logic flow
Rate all pairs of options
Rate all members of team opinions Airport Docks Factory Engines Canal Garage Bridge
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%24.4%
21.4%
14.0% 13.7%
10.8%9.0%
6.8%
total team view (unweighted) in rank order
Te
am
re
su
lt p
erc
en
tag
e
Airport Bridge Ca na l Doc k s Engine s Fa c tory Ga ra ge
0%2%4%6%8%
10%12% 10.1%
3.9%5.5%
8.4%6.9%
6.1%5.5%
standard deviation of all team members from each option result
Tea
m d
evia
tio
n p
erce
nta
ge
More than 8 different outputs prioritising the agreed options
What-If?scenarios
Up to 10Team
members orSub-groups
Up to 7Options orProjects
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 14
Complex calculations performed to give detailed and very accurate results
Up to 10 members inputs
Across all 21 pairs of 7 options
Each member rates all other members for strength of opinion. This is an anonymous input
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 15
SmartWayToDecide© outputs
a sample of some of the many report outputs
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 16
Airport Bridge Canal Docks Engines Factory Garage0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
total team view (main result)with min and max range across all team
Te
am
re
su
lt p
erc
en
tag
e
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 17
Airport Bridge Canal Docks Engines Factory Garage0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
10.1%
3.9%
5.5%
8.4%
6.9%
6.1%5.5%
standard deviation of all team members from each option result
Te
am
de
via
tio
n p
erc
en
tag
e
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 18
Airport Docks Factory Engines Canal Garage Bridge0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%24.4%
21.4%
14.0% 13.7%
10.8%
9.0%
6.8%
total team view (unweighted) in rank orderT
ea
m r
es
ult
pe
rce
nta
ge
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
8.5%
6.2%
9.2%8.5%
13.8%
12.3%
6.9%
10.8%
12.3%11.5%
Opinion rating of team members
Main influencer
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 20
This is an influential member that needs
convincing !
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 21
5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
standard deviation of team from each option
option percentage
Sta
nd
ard
de
via
tio
n o
f e
ac
h o
pti
on
High importanceLow variation
Low importanceHigh variation
Average importanceLow variation
High importanceHigh variation
This is a low rated project but with a
higher variation than expected. Why?
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 22
AirportBridge
CanalDocks
EnginesFactory
Garage
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%24%
7%
11%
21%
14%14%
9%
25%
6%
11%
21%
14%14%
8%
opinion weighted team view (Blue) versus equal weighted result (Green)
Te
am
re
su
lt p
erc
en
tag
e
SmartWayToDecide© 2010 23
TEAM MEMBERS EQUAL OPINION TEAM MEMBERS VARYING OPINION
sorted rank sorted rank differences
1 Airport 24.4% 0.6% 1 Airport 25.0%
3.7%
2 Docks 21.4% 0.0% 2 Docks 21.3% 7.1%
3 Factory 14.0% 0.2% 3 Engines 14.2% 0.4%
4 Engines 13.7% 0.1% 4 Factory 13.8% 2.4%
5 Canal 10.8% 0.6% 5 Canal 11.3% 3.2%
6 Garage 9.0% -0.8% 6 Garage 8.2% 1.9%
7 Bridge 6.8% -0.6% 7 Bridge 6.3%