An improvement target must be (partly) evaluated in terms of the amount of work required from the organization. PRAIORITIZE uses some very advanced algorithms to calculate the target's resulting list of praiorities for respondents and summarizes these in four flavors:
The improvement is very moderate and only a minority of respondents get affected.
Usually, such a short list is a sign of too little ambition.
The inmprovement is not too big. No/hardly any individual gets overdemanded.
Very significant improvement workload. Affects the majority/all respondents.
Very intense, unrealistic improvement workload. Might affect some, most or all respondents.
To get to the Praiority list screen, click on the tile or click in the navigation bar:
Improve > Praiority list > Conclusion
The top half of the screen shows the management summary and two circle-graphs:
We conducted research in close to 4,000 teams and again and again, it shows that a minority of questions and respondents cover a majority of the gap between the actual situation and target. The two circle diagrams show exactly what percentage of questions and respondents cover what part of this gap.
Hence, the bottom two tables of the screen show on which questions and respondents to focus. Both the questions and respondents are – by default – sorted by their relative ‘contribution’ to the gap. The Focus on these questions table's rightmost column shows links to the improvement steps (if these have been enabled; contact the Assessment Coordinator in your organization for details). The Focus on these respondents table's rightmost column shows links to the individual respondents’ dashboard (again, if these have been enabled; contact the Assessment Coordinator in your organization).
Graph: the Gap Map
The Gap Map is used for a reality check of the praiority list.
To get to the Gap Map, click in the navigation bar:
Improve > Praiority list > Graph
In the Gap Map, the questions are in the rows, the respondents in the columns. The number in the 'cells' represents the answer given by the respondent on that question ('1' being the worst answer, '2' the next best answer, etc.). The cell color indicates whether (and how much) that score is below, on, or above the improvement target for that question for that specific respondent:
Here is an example.
Six respondents answered this question "How are objectives reviewed?". One of these six respondents answered anonymously (no name visible). This respondent - and Tamara - both scored answer 1 (the worst answer on a PRAIORITIZE-question). Mary-ann and Rick scored the middle answer and Carlos and Erik the best answer. With that answer, Carlos and Erik score grey which means: on target. That means that Mary-Ann and Rick come 1 answer (step) short and Tamara and the anonymous respondent every two answers. In total, this group of respondents is 6 steps short of the target. This is 23% of all steps short in all questions that have been assigned to the selected target.
Now we compare all questions.
We see that the first question is 23% of the total gap. And that the first three questions are almost 1/3 of the gap between the actual situation and target. The moment you choose for a higher maturity level (a heavier target) the Gap Map will become increasingly blue until all green cells, and later even most of the grey ones, disappear. The empty (white) cells indicate that a respondent did not answer that particular question. The praiority list is evaluated by two components: how 'blue' is the Gap Map and are the blue cells somewhat equally divided among the respondents.
Of course, you can tailor the Gap Map to your own needs. The Topics dropdown allows focusing on one or more topics. The Respondents dropdown allows to in-/exclude certain respondent groups. The View dropdown gives you the possibility to modify which of the respondents' personal details (e.g. name, email address, department, role) is heading the column.