A quick and efficient way to evaluate and prioritize ideas or alternatives based on two critical factors: their impact and the ease of implementation.
Adapted from the payoff matrix of GE's Work-Out program (Dave Ulrich, Steve Kerr, and Ron Ashkenas, The GE Work-Out, 2002), the impact-against-ease grid that Lean Six Sigma teams also use as the PICK chart.
What it is for
The purpose of the Ease-Impact Assessment Matrix is to provide a quick and efficient way to evaluate and prioritize ideas or alternatives based on two critical factors: their impact and the ease of implementation. This thinking tool is especially valuable in scenarios where decision-makers need to focus on options that will have a significant effect while being feasible to execute. The tool's functionality can be broken down as follows:
- Idea Organization. It starts with listing out all potential ideas or alternatives, encouraging a comprehensive view of available options.
- Impact and Ease Scoring. Each idea is scored on a scale from 1 to 9, with higher scores indicating high impact and ease of implementation. This scoring system helps in objectively assessing the potential value and practicality of each idea.
- Visual Prioritization. By plotting these ideas on a matrix, the tool visually distinguishes between high-value, easy-to-implement options and those that are less feasible or impactful. This aids in quickly identifying the "low-hanging fruit": ideas that offer the greatest impact with the least implementation challenges.
- Strategic Focus. The matrix assists in directing resources and efforts toward ideas that are most likely to succeed and provide significant benefits, ensuring efficient use of time and resources.
- Action Planning. Following the assessment, it provides a framework to develop actionable plans for the top-prioritized ideas, thereby facilitating their practical implementation.
In essence, the Ease-Impact Assessment Matrix is an indispensable tool for strategic decision-making, allowing teams and leaders to identify and act on the most promising and practical ideas swiftly.
Why use it
This template is created for a fast and straightforward method to rank options that are both easy to implement and offer significant impact.
How to use it
- List alternatives on a separate sheet with a one- or two-word name.
- Assign a score to each alternative: 1 for low impact and difficult to implement; 9 for high impact and easy to implement.
- Use the matrix to identify priorities: ideas close to a score of 9 are high-impact and easily implementable ("low-hanging fruit").
The scores, by difficulty and impact:
- Difficult to implement. Low impact 1, medium impact 2, high impact 3.
- Moderate difficulty to implement. Low impact 4, medium impact 5, high impact 6.
- Easy to implement. Low impact 7, medium impact 8, high impact 9.
Seven ways to keep customers, placed by ease and impact
A firm losing subscribers places seven ideas on the grid; each cell carries its score from 1 to 9, which counts ease first, so an easy idea of low impact (7) ranks above a hard one of high impact (3). Select an idea to see why it sits there. Illustrative.
Low impactImpactHigh impact
Difficult to implementEaseEasy to implement
- Reminders: Ease 3 of 3, Impact 3 of 3. Easy: the billing system can already send renewal reminders. High impact: a fifth of last year's lapses were renewals nobody noticed.
- Usage alerts: Ease 2 of 3, Impact 3 of 3. Moderate: it needs a feed from the product's usage data. High impact: most customers who left had gone quiet for a month first.
- Intro calls: Ease 3 of 3, Impact 2 of 3. Easy: account managers already call new customers once. Medium impact: it helps in the first quarter, when few customers leave.
- Price cut: Ease 3 of 3, Impact 1 of 3. Easy: one change to the price list. Low impact: customers who left named service, not price.
- Exit survey: Ease 2 of 3, Impact 2 of 3. Moderate: someone has to read and sort the answers. Medium impact: it explains losses but prevents none by itself.
- New platform: Ease 1 of 3, Impact 3 of 3. Difficult: a year of work and a migration. High impact: it fixes the slow pages customers complain about most.
- Loyalty points: Ease 1 of 3, Impact 1 of 3. Difficult: the billing system cannot hold a points balance. Low impact: no customer asked for one.
The worksheet: a priority matrix for idea evaluation
- Idea Listing Area. To catalog various alternatives or ideas for consideration. A column for listing alternatives with a brief one- or two-word name.
- Scoring Guide. To provide a reference for scoring alternatives. A description of scoring criteria: 1 = Low Impact, difficult to implement; 9 = High Impact, easy to implement.
- Idea Scoring Section. To assign impact and feasibility scores to each alternative. Columns to assign scores to each alternative, based on the 1 to 9 scale.
- Visualization Grid. To visually represent the priority of ideas based on scores. A grid or chart to plot alternatives based on their scores, aiding in visual comparison, highlighting "low-hanging fruit" ideas closer to 9.
- Prioritization Analysis. To analyze and decide on focus areas. Space for notes or discussions on why certain ideas are prioritized over others, based on their location in the grid.
- Action Plan Development. To outline steps for implementing top prioritized ideas. A template or section to develop action plans for the highest-scoring, most feasible ideas.
Where it fits
The process recommends it at Selecting the Right Decision Tools, the second step of the Evaluate phase, beside the Critical Consensus Constructor and the Conversation Convergence Process.
Related tools
Within this series, the Collective Idea Explorer generates the ideas this matrix sorts, and the Impact-Focused Problem Approach scores the parts of a single problem by impact alone and works them down one at a time, where this matrix places many options on two axes at once.
- Eisenhower Matrix (Eisenhower, Covey, Merrill, and others)
- Weighted Decision Matrix (Kepner, Tregoe, Pugh, and others)
- Pareto Principle (Pareto and Juran)