Background
Humans make around 20,000 decisions every day. Fortunately, in most cases this is automated and therefore energy-saving. Jam or cheese on a roll? Blue or black sweater? Elevator or stairs? First to the desk or fetch a coffee from the kitchen?
However, as soon as we make decisions as a team, we cannot use this automatism. At the same time, challenges are becoming more and more complex. This increases the need to develop solutions in teams and make decisions together.
The funny thing is that when it comes to simple topics, everyone is happy to express their opinion and you often find yourself in endless discussions without coming to a decision. However, as soon as things become more complex, most people are happy to leave the decisions to someone else – be it the boss or the expert. By using suitable methods, this “law of triviality” (or “bikeshedding” effect) can be avoided. Bikeshedding is a metaphor that describes the tendency for people to spend a disproportionate amount of time on trivial matters – often at the expense of more important ones).
Here we focus on methods that allow several people to make a decision together.
- Dot voting
- Fist to five
- 100$ Test
- Impact-effort matrix (one type of a prioritization / decision matrix)
1. Dot Voting
By using dots, a team can very easily decide between different options or prioritize different tasks or topics.
Step-by-Step Instructions
- What is being voted on?
The different options or topics are written on individual post-it notes and collected on a (digital) whiteboard. It must be ensured that everyone has the same understanding of the topic. - How is the voting carried out?
Each participant receives the same number of votes (points). A sensible number results from the 4:1 ratio of topics to points. (e.g. with 12 topics, everyone receives three points). At physical meetings, sticky dots are distributed (if necessary, lines can also be made on the post-its); at digital meetings, the features of Mural, Miro or Whiteboard can be used for dot voting. - Voting
The participants vote with their dots. It should be clarified in advance whether someone can cast several votes for one option. - Result
At the end of the voting round, you have a favourite or a prioritization. If necessary, a further vote can be held between the options with the most votes in the event of a tie.
Pro: Dot Voting is a quick and easy way to prioritize topics and make decisions. It can also be incorporated spontaneously into any meeting.
Con: In physical meetings, dot voting can lead to mutual influence. When using Mural or Miro, you can vote anonymously. The results of the others only become visible when the facilitator closes the voting.
Group size
3 – almost infinite
Time
5 minutes for voting (following the explanation of the options)
Material
Whitebord, Post-it notes, Dots (or pens)
2. Fist to Five
The Fist to Five method aims to make decisions to which no participant has a strong objection. In contrast to dot voting, not several options are “put to the vote” at the same time, but decisions are made on individual proposals
The degree of approval or rejection is signaled by a show of hands. The number of outstretched fingers means:
Clenched fist (no finger): “Veto! I am completely against.”
One finger: “I’m not completely against it. But there’s still a lot needed for me to agree.”
Two fingers: “I have reservations, but will follow the majority.”
Three fingers: “I’m not enthusiastic, but I can live with the proposal.”
Four fingers: “I agree.”
Five fingers: “I think it’s brilliant. It doesn’t get any better than this.”
Step-by-Step Instructions
- What is being voted on?
It must be clearly formulated what you want to get approval for. Therefore, after the presentation of a proposal, the proposed decision should be clearly formulated once again and the question should be asked whether this is clear to everyone. - Voting
If possible, the participants should give their evaluation by raising their hands at the same time. - Result
If there is a veto, the proposal fails. - After the vote, all those who have concerns should express their objections. Concerns can either be discussed directly, so that a new vote is possible afterwards, or – depending on the extent of the concerns – reworking can take place in separate meetings. The proposal can then be submitted again in a revised form.
Group size
3 – 15
Time
1 minute for the voting
Material
Nothing but 5 fingers per participant
2. 100$ Test
Another simple and effective method for prioritizing options (and therefore also a basis for decision-making) is the 100$ test (also known as the 100 points method). Each participant is given 100 (unfortunately only fictitious) dollars to spend on the various options.
Step-by-Step Instructions
- What is voted on?
All options are noted on post-its on a (digital) whiteboard – preferably in a matrix (options / participants).
Not surprisingly for you: Once again, the options must be clear to all participants. - Voting
Each participant writes down the amount they are willing to pay for the option. It is possible to place the entire 100$ on one option or to divide it up in any number of steps.
- Evaluation
Now you actually have a prioritization. However, it is worth taking a look at the extremes first. Where do the clear differences come from? Are there strong concerns? Or a different understanding of the option? This needs to be clarified. Then, if necessary, a second round can be carried out.
This method is very well suited for virtual meetings.
Group size
5 – 15
Time
2 minutes for the voting
Material
(digital) Whiteboard, Post-it notes
4. Impact-Effort-Matrix
Eine Impact-Effort-Matrix ist eine sogenannte Priorisierungs-Matrix. Im Team wird eine gemeinsame Einschätzung getroffen wie man eine Vielzahl von Optionen danach beurteilen kann, wie hoch ihr Impact und der Aufwand ist.
(Anmerkung: Man kann eine solche Priorisierungs-Matrix auch mit anderen Kriterien aufbauen – ja nach Relevanz der Entscheidungskriterien).
Step-by-Step Instruction
- What is voted on?
First, all options are collected (on post-its). Again, it is important that all participants have a good understanding of the options. - Evaluation criteria
Enter the two criteria on the x- and y-axis of the matrix (see picture)
In this case, the criteria impact and effort are already predefined. Costs often play an important role and are selected as a criterion. - Evaluation (x-axis)
Now – preferably working silently – place the suggestions on the x-axis (impact). What is the “value” of this option? Sort all suggestions next to each other without overlapping. This is a decisive factor for the success of this method. - Evaluation (y-axis)
Then move the post-its up or down on the y-axis (how high is the effort). Make sure that the post-its do not change in the evaluation of criterion X. - Assessment
Now you have a picture that gives you a good impression of the different options.
High impact / low effort: You have quick wins that you should prioritize highly and implement quickly
High impact / high effort: You should tackle these strategic topics in a planned manner
Low impact / low effort: You can address these topics ” maybe later” – if there is “time left”
Low impact / high effort: You should cross these topics off your list. - Determine which topics you want to tackle in which order and who will take care of them.
Pro: Due to its flexibility and relatively objective approach, this matrix can be applied to numerous prioritization cases. This is particularly useful if you are under time pressure or have very limited resources. The visualization helps with decision-making.
Con: Prioritization frameworks are completely blind to all criteria that are not considered within the framework.
Group size
3 – 15
Time
Depends on number of options. Approx. 15 – 20 minutes for placement in the matrix
Material
Post-its, (digital) whiteboard, Matrix (download)
Downloads
Impact-Effort-Matrix
Additional Resources
Dr. Verena Utikal: Kopf oder Bauch? Wie das Gehirn Entscheidungen fällt., Haufe.de (2020) – German only
RELATED METHODS
Zwicky Box (aka Morphological Analysis)IDM – Integrative Decision Making Process
Safeword
