What are the best ways to prioritize group ideas and goals?

The Eisenhower Matrix, as popularized by Franklin-Covey, is a leadership-shifting and -shaping approach. While we often prioritize strictly based on urgency, it adds a second dimension: importance. Identifying and lifting "important but not urgent" (Q2) items rather than defaulting to "urgent but not important ones" (Q3) - transforms teams and outcomes.

I want to share a methodology called "6 Thinking Hats" that can help prioritize group ideas and goals. 1. White Hat - Focus on facts. Gather all the objective details 2. Red Hat - Get reactions and gut feelings. 3. Black Hat - Identify weaknesses and risks. 4. Yellow Hat - Find strengths and benefits. 5. Green Hat - Generate creative solutions. 6. Blue Hat - Make conclusions. Review all the thinking and determine which ideas/goals are most feasible and valuable based on the insights gained from the six hats. Agree on priorities.

I often use a matrix where I put "Importance" in a bottom line and "Difficulty" as a column, then we have 4 squares : The one on the bottom left represents "Distractions", the one on the bottom right "High value", the one on the top left "Luxury", and the one on the top right "Strategic". The group can place its ideas, expectations or objectives accordingly. Obviously, anything in "high value" will be dealt with first, since the idea is important but not too complicated to implement. The "strategic" box is also worth exploring, as the items in it are considered important but not easy to achieve, so should be imagined over the longer term.

Embracing a criteria matrix is a strategic move as a project management expert and team leader, offering a systematic approach to decision-making and project optimization. The matrix proves invaluable in evaluating and prioritizing project ideas or goals, emphasizing predetermined criteria crucial to success. Begin by clearly defining relevant criteria, tailoring them to align with project objectives. Assign weights to each criterion, reflecting their relative importance and impact on project success. Evaluate each idea against the criteria, utilizing a numerical scale for scoring. The software tools to automate this are becoming more prevalent.

Ah, the art of juggling group ideas and goals! It's like hosting a potluck dinner where everyone brings their favorite dish. First, you lay everything out on the table. That's your brainstorming session – no idea is too spicy or too sweet. Then, you take a step back and see what you've got. It's time for a taste test! Prioritize based on what aligns best with your goals (think of these as your dietary restrictions). And remember, just because Aunt Edna's casserole didn't make the cut this time, doesn't mean it won't be the star at the next dinner. Keep it in the fridge! In the end, the goal is a balanced meal that leaves everyone satisfied. Bon appétit to success!

Try Crazy8s - participants write down 1 idea per minute for 8 minutes. Then discuss thier ideas in a group and combine into best ideas. Each group shares ideas with room and discusses. Ideas go on post its on wall. Then everyone gets 3 dots to votes. Ideas get shaped into a solution set based on votes. It usually ends up with a core idea and then several sub-ideas.

A tool I find to be instrumental in gauging participants’ needs is the use of a virtual sticky-note platform as Padlet. In my capacity as a facilitator, I would first send out a questionnaire that generates an excel of participant feedbacks/requests/curiosities, then main topics would be generated- of which will be presented on the virtual ‘wall’. Participants will then contribute ideas/questions to (but as such not limited to) these topics. Finally, this data is populated and the most voted/popular topic will be prioritized for the session, and others’ will be kept as ‘bookmarks’ that may still be touched upon in a breakaway session. This method of consensus reminds me of the traditional method ‘musyawarah mufakat’.

As a project management expert and team leader, I recommend the dot voting method for quick and effective idea prioritization. Participants write down ideas on sticky notes, display them, and receive a set number of dots to vote for their favorites. Tally up the dots to identify top priorities. This method accelerates decision-making, encourages active participation, and fosters a sense of collective ownership and commitment among team members. Integrating dot voting enhances consensus-driven prioritization in a streamlined manner. I have observed this method excel particularly in the context of software roadmaps. By inviting clients to contribute and vote on the significance of specific software enhancements, we enhance collaboration.

Our company prides itself in team collaboration & happiness. It’s important every member of our team feels a sense of pride in what they do & contributes in a way to assist in creating ownership.

The dot voting method goes back to our most ancient roots (gold stars in Kindergarten). It's democratic, and distills opinions into actual choices. I very much looking forward to a digital version of this that can delineate between both total number, and unique number of people. Also with the weighting, based on your experience/relevance to that area (Ray Dalio "more believable" principle).

In a project team deciding on software features, a pairwise comparison simplifies prioritization. List features in a matrix, have the team compare and rank them. By analyzing preferences, you swiftly identify the most favored features, reducing complexity and biases. This method unveils hidden preferences, streamlining decision-making for impactful software development.

This works for gettin your glasses prescription dialed in, and works for your crafting your ideas and outputs as well. More work is needed to help facilitate this, within Microsoft Teams or such similar applications. Decisions between many can be overwhelming, but decisions between two binary choices very much distills actual preferences.

In my experience, MoSCoW has worked in prioritising ideas and scope items. However, value needs to be considered whilst applying MoSCoW. It should be clear why a particular idea is a Must-Have when compared to another one which is a Could-Have.

I've been part of a global team applying the MoSCoW method to a project developing a new mobile app. "Must haves" might include core functionalities like user authentication. "Should haves" could encompass features like in-app messaging. "Could haves" might involve non-essential but desirable elements like additional customization options. "Won't haves" may include features deemed out of scope, such as augmented reality integration.

I've worked on projects with teams comprising of software developers and business analysts and the MoSCow method was very helpful in identifying priorities. Sometimes, developers get excited about some kind of feature or functionality within a software project and commit time and resources to getting it done. However, that a developer finds it exciting does not make it a Must-Have within that project. MoSCow helps everyone in an agile team align with the project priorities for each iteration.

When I facilitate, I try to use this card as a last resort. I think we can continue to help decide with a few coaching methods, while avoiding the decision being ours. Another question can then emerge, to refine the answers and try to get the group to agree. I think it's important that the main ideas come from the participants, so that the group really adopts the goal. I also often ask when I'm the one writing down the ideas expressed, for example, whether the group agrees with my transcription: "Is that what you meant?", "Peter, when you said that idea, could you clarify it again so that I understand if it fits into this category?" or "We've reached a perfect tie, so we'll proceed to a second vote among the most voted items".

Venessa, makes a good point. Good: Using a facilitator's judgment allows for quick decisions in large, diverse, or conflicted groups. It leverages the facilitator's experience and intuition, promoting confident leadership. Bad: However, relying solely on the facilitator's judgment may risk subjectivity. Transparency, accountability, and openness to group feedback are crucial to mitigate potential biases and ensure fair decision-making. Getting the team's buy-in consistently enhances the outcomes, as the team takes ownership.

Being into training from last 7years, I have understood that while facilitating, it is important to have knowledge and we should not stick to the slides as the example given on the matter may not suit everyone. We should consider entire audience to come to conclusion and also ask audience to put in their thoughts and share examples.

An important point to add is a need to agree on criteria ahead of time. Is it customer experience or winning against competition or costs savings? A debate starting from different goals setting becomes political. A debate against the same goals is easier to settle with numbers and tests.

When working with groups, sometimes it is challenging for participants to prioritize because EVERYTHING is important, EVERYTHING is doable and EVERYTHING aligns with goals (or whatever the determining factors are). In these situations, I often remind participants that deciding to work on two or three areas now does not mean the others will not be worked on later. Participants understand that the identified priorities are a starting point, and as progress is made, there will be opportunities to revisit and address other important aspects. This strategy eases the pressure associated with immediate decision-making and promotes long-term goal-setting. "Prioritization is a strategic choice rather than the only commitment." #tshirt

We use a custom version of #TMVi(tm) #Algorithm. First, we start with everyone’s #assumptions because if assumptions are wrong, whole analysis is flawed. #Problem definition must include consequences that will occur if we don’t do something now. Then we objectively ask 4-holistic pillar questions. Where does #Technology &, #marketing, #ventures, #“inc” relate to decisions and solution. The value is at the intersection of tech, marketing, ventures, inc.

Companies should use internal evaluations on potential products and platforms being launched, throughout the innovation process. While the products may clear various financial hurdles, and the data provided by the launch manager "supports" such a new product or extension, those judgements are often highly biased. Extended teams (i.e. the whole business ) should quantify their views on the merits and overall strength of the innovation being launched. In CPG, it's my experience that ~50% of unsuccessful products would not have been launched/supported by the team, and that had their views been incorporated earlier, the chances of success in market would have been significantly higher. Executives approving projects would find this valuable.

Working with brilliants minds within a team implies that there will always be so many "great" ideas on the table. It is therefore important to organize and prioritize what the team commits to per time. This level of focus on an idea or task will improve effectiveness as well as save time. While the criteria for prioritizing may differ from team to team based on the context in which they are working, good communication must be part of a team's culture.