Post on 02-Jan-2016
description
Prioritizing Agency Needs
Lakewood Resource & Referral Center
212 Second Street, Suite 204Lakewood, New Jersey 08701
The Topics We’ll be Covering
Pri
ori
tizin
g
Ag
en
cy N
eed
s
Setting The Goals
Developing the Tasks
Categorizing the Tasks
The Impact of Time
Prioritization Techniques
The Framework
The Framework
Categorizing the Tasks
Developing The TasksSetting The
Goals
The Impact of Time
The Framework
Setting The Goals
Goals
Vision Mission
Values
SMART Goals
S
M
A
T
R
Specific
Measurable
Attainable
Realistic
Time Based
1 2
2 Points
The Framework
Developing the Tasks
What?
When?
Who?
Where?
Why?
How?
Lowest Input for
Maximum Output
6 Questions
The Framework
Categorize the Tasks
Dependent Tasks
Independent Tasks
Inter -dependent
Tasks
Determined by another
Task
Self Sufficient
Mutually Dependent
The Framework
The Impact of Time
A defined window of opportunity to accomplish Tasks
Not Everything can Get Done
What Goes Last?
What Goes First?
The Framework
Goals – Within the Framework of the Mission, Vision and Values
Tasks – Structured Efficiently, To achieve those Goals
Category – Categorize tasks as Dependent, Independent or Interdependent
Time Restriction – The Tasks are all Restrained by limited Time
Goals
Tasks
Time
Summing it up.
What the Framework Looks like
EfficientDepende
nt Tasks
Efficient
Tasks
Efficient Interdepende
nt Tasks
Only 50% of Tasks will be accomplished
Their Characteristic
s Vary
Which Tasks take
Precedence
Summing it up.
Techniques for Prioritizing
Six
Tech
niq
ues
Pareto Principle
Covey’s Quadrants
Paired Comparison Matrix
Action Priority Matrix
Carver Matrix
Triage
How to Prioritize…
80% of the Italian Wealth was distributed to
20% of the Population
Unequal distribution of efforts as they relate to impact
Vilfredo Pareto
Pareto Principle
Pareto Principle
Produce80% of the
Peas
20% of the Pods
80/20 Rule
Unequal distribution of results as they correlate
to efforts
Pareto Principle
20% of the input creates 80% of the
result
20% of the Donors donate 80% of the
Donations
20% of the customers create 80% of the
revenue
20% of the features cause 80% of the usage
Focus on the 20%
that counts
Oth
er
Are
as -
80
/20
Ru
le
Pareto Principle
Summing it up.
80/20 Rule
Uneven Distribution of efforts vs. Outputs
Identify the 20% that impacts most
Focus resources towards it
Organize and Execute around Priorities
The Four quadrants that all tasks fit into
Stephen R. Covey
Covey’s Quadrant’s
Covey’s Quadrants
Quadrant 4
Quadrant 2
Quadrant 3
Quadrant 1
Urgent Not Urgent
Imp
ort
an
tN
ot
Imp
ort
an
t
Important vs. Urgent
Covey’s Quadrants
Quadrant 4
Urgent Not Urgent
Imp
ort
an
tN
ot
Imp
ort
an
t
Quadrant 1
Crisis
Quadrant 3
Interruption
Quadrant 2
Prevention
Trivia
QII is allocated
the highest priority
QI gets taken
care of First, But of Lower Priority than QII
What gets higher Priority?
Covey’s Quadrants
Quadrant 4
Quadrant 2
Quadrant 3
Quadrant 1
Urgent Not Urgent
Imp
ort
an
tN
ot
Imp
ort
an
t
What goes first?
Covey’s Quadrants
Summing it up.
All Tasks fit into Four Quadrants
Priority is given to Quadrant II
Quadrant I gets immediate attention
Pickle Jar – Fill to Maximum Capacity
Weighing Options in pairs
Law of Comparative Judgment
Identifying which option in the pair is preferredL. L. Thurstone
Paired Comparison Analysis
Paired Comparison
Paired Comparison Analysis
A
CB
A B CListing The Tasks
Weighing them against each other
Calculating the Task Values
Paired Comparison
Option A
Option C
Option B
Option A Option B Option C
A3
C1
B2
A = 3 B = 2C = 1
A = 50%B = 33.5%C = 16.5%
Values Scores
Paired Comparison
Summing it up.
Create a list of Tasks
Weigh Tasks against each other in Pairs
Assign Relative Values to Tasks
Focus on the Highest Value Tasks First
Compares Priorities across multiple areas
Categorizes Tasks as a tradeoff between effort and Impact
Malcolm Baldrige
Action Priority Matrix
Action Priority Matrix
Effort vs. Reward
Listing The Tasks
Determining the Efforts and Impact
Plotting it down on a graph
Action Priority Matrix
High/Low, Effort/Impact
Effort
Imp
act
High Impact, Low Effort
High Impact, High Effort
Low Impact, Low Effort Low Impact,
High Effort
1 10
10
Action Priority Matrix
Summing it up.
Plot Graph With Task’s Effort/Impact Level
Split Graph into Quarters
Focus First on Low Effort/High Impact
Low Priority to Low Impact Tasks
Ranks Tasks against each other Using 6 Criteria
Assists in the allocation of limited resources
Special Operations Command
CARVER Matrix
CARVER Matrix
CARVER
C
A
R
E
V
Critical
Accessible
Return
Vulnerable
Effects
R Recognizable
CARVER Matrix
REVA RC
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option E
Option D
Total
4 4 2 533
42 3 5 33
1 4 22 11
2 55 412
4 55 112
20
19
18
1121
CARVER Matrix
Summing it up.
Rank Tasks For Each Perspective of CARVER
Tally up Overall Scores
Highest Score Gets Highest Priority
Lowest Score Gets Lowest Priority
Triage
Used to Prioritize in Medical Crisis
A System for allocating limited resources
Dominique Jean Larrey
Triage
Cannot Survive
Will Only Survive with Help
Will Survive without Help
Ignore For Now
Attend to Now
Ignore for now
Tier 1
Tier 2
Tier 3
A Three Tier System for Crisis Management
TRIAGE
Triage
TRIAGE
Available Resources inadequate to Impact
1
2
3
Available Resources inadequate to assist
Available Resources able to ImpactAvailable Resources able to assist
Available Resources Unnecessary to Impact
Available Resources Unnecessary to assist
Medicine Time Management
Gets Ignored
Gets Highest Priority
Gets Ignored
Triage
Summing it up.
Used to Allocate Limited Resources
Three Tiered System
Highest Priority assigned to tasks that can impact with available
resources
Ignore all Others
The Framework
Prioritizing the Tasks
Summing it all up….
SMART Goals
Efficient Tasks
Categories of Tasks
The Impact of Time
Pareto Principle
Covey’s Quadrants
Paired Comparison Analysis
Action Priority Matrix
CARVER
Triage
Thank You.
Q&A