Both techniques can be used by an individual or a group.
Being highly visual and involving, they are particularly effective within a group setting.
A full explanation for each is provided.
Simple and effective.
I have noticed that problem solving groups tend to break down into two groups requiring different prioritising criteria:
* some want a more generic approach – cost / benefit matrix
* others require numbers as well as the financial implications involved to enable them to prioritise – action / priority matrix.
This one diagram provides information on two techniques that will satisfy both groups. A full explanation of each is provided.
Can be used by an individual or a group.
Risk analysis is key if you are to identify and prioritise the impact of problems, real or potential.
This, and the next three diagrams, (1.13.2 – 1.13.4) offer a variety of risk analysis tools.
Three models are offered here.
All are apparently ‘simple’ but, as is the case in problem solving and risk analysis, there are invariably more complex issues underpinning the cause(s) of any problem you might face.
The basic risk evaluation model provides a robust process and reinforces the point regarding the interdependence of each element.
The likelihood / consequences matrix has been found effective for ‘quick and dirty’ risk evaluation when time pressures have been intense.
Both methods can be used together very effectively.
A more in-depth look at the likelihood / consequences matrix.
Definitions for both are provided.
This is a more ‘numbers’ based matrix that can provide value to individuals as well as groups that prefer to work this way (see comments regarding 1.12)
Sometimes there are reasons for accepting risks.
This diagram will enable you to understand whether an As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) process is appropriate – or not.