To calculate the available capacity to change, PRAIORITIZE has to work with the available information from the assessment. Most likely, there are no questions in the questionnaire itself that specifically ask about the group's capacity to change. Therefore, PRAIORITIZE defines capacity as a combination of (1.) the unnecessary improvements that have been planned by the respondents and (2.) the percentage of respondents that have already achieved (most of) the proposed target. That results in 4 flavors:
Some/lots of planned work not necessary anymore, and many people are close enough to the selected target that they have the time to share knowledge and help others.
Some/lots of planned work not necessary anymore.
But ... not many people can help with knowledge sharing.
Some/lots of extra work on top of the improvements planned by the respondents.
Luckily, many people can help with sharing knowledge.
Some/lots of extra work on top of the improvements planned by the respondents
and unfortunately, knowledge sharing is driven by only a few people.
To get to the "Capacity to change"-screen, click on the tile or click in the navigation bar:
Improve > Capacity to change > Conclusion
Other than the conclusions regarding the battery icons, there is much more to see on this page:
Half of the Capacity to change is calculated by the amount of waste planned by respondents. 'Waste' is planned improvements that are not part of the target. This is shown in the mini-table left of the circle diagram. Improvements that are planned by respondents and are part of the target are ‘Planned right.’ Improvements that have not been planned by the respondents but are required by the target are referred to as ‘Shortage.’ Add Right, Shortage, and Waste together. PRAIORITIZE calculates whether the net effects are more or less work than originally planned (thus, requiring or freeing up capacity, respectively). The table below the circle diagrams shows the questions with waste and shortage.
The other half of the Capacity is calculated by the percentage of respondents that can share knowledge. The number of respondents that can share knowledge (and the resulting percentage) is shown in the circle diagram. Information about these respondents, where they reside, and how to contact them is shown in the bottom table ‘Respondents who can share knowledge’.
Sharing knowledge is about gaining productivity by not reinventing the wheel. Respondent 1 needs to improve on question A. Rather than reinvent the wheel, she can ask Respondent 2 to share knowledge. Giving knowledge is easy to do and usually requires little effort; receiving knowledge, on the other hand, saves a lot of time. Express that net time saved in money, and a mini business case is shown right of the circle diagram. The last bullet of the conclusion section (on the top half of the screen) dissects the calculated monetary value of knowledge sharing. The underlying average time saved per question and salary cost (per day) per employee are defined in the assessment settings. Ask your Assessment Coordinator for details.
Graph: the Buddy Map
The Buddy Map shows who can share knowledge with whom.
To get to the Buddy Map, click on the navigation bar:
Improve > Capacity to change > Graph
Here is an example:
This is a network diagram with the "nodes" (the circles) representing the respondents and the "edges" (the arrows) representing who can help whom. The nodes differ by color and depend on the selection how to segment the respondents in the Respondents dropdown menu (e.g., by department, role, location, etc.).
You can tailor the Buddy Map to your own needs. The Topics dropdown allows you to focus on one or more topics. The Respondents dropdown allows to in-/exclude certain respondent groups. The View dropdown allows you to modify the graph:
The line style is by default set to Curved as this gives a 'spacier' look. The font size changes the size of the name of the respondents.
In a larger organization, you want to avoid that many people will call Mary-Ann, who turns out to already have achieved the target on a specific question. She won't have a life, all day busy helping colleagues! Hence, PRAIORITIZE features the Help from group section in the View dropdown menu. Here, you can define how many people a respondent can ask for help ("In") and how many people a respondent should help himself ("Out"). Experience shows that a value of 2, 3, or 4 already gets 60%-85% of the shareable knowledge covered. These low values ensure that the sharing activity does not get too complex.
There are four algorithms to choose from, each mildly affecting the overall sharing percentage (visualized in the circle graph, in the top half of the Buddy Map's legend). The Waterfall lets the best scoring respondents help with the somewhat lower scoring respondents, who, in turn help the again lower-scoring respondents, etc. On a scale of 0-10: the 9's help the 8's who help the 7's and so on
Outside-in is the opposite. The best scoring respondents help the least scoring respondents. On a scale of 0-10: the 9's help the 1's, the 8's help the 2's, and so on.
The Interval combines Waterfall and Outside-in. On a scale of 0-10: the 9's help the 5's, the 8's help the 4's, and so on.
Finally, the Mix blends the first three algorithms depending on the edge.
In most cases, PRAIORITIZE will automatically calculate the settings that yield the highest percentage of knowledge sharing covered.