Project Everest

Proposed PROJECT

Ideating Tool - Feasibility Matrix

by
Hannah Daghighi
Hannah Daghighi | Jan 11, 2017 | in Ideas Box

The Energy and Fuel Assessment Team haven developed a feasibility matrix - a matrix designed to take into account the key factors considered when attempting to determine the success of a product/service idea. We aim to have this so that all ideas are considered in a standardised manner. Our spreadsheet consists of cells in which you can insert a numerical rating of the factor from 1-10, and the second sheet of the spreadsheet allows you to input reasoning for that rating (Notes tab). 

This matrix is in early stages, we are looking for feedback and any suggestions to add to our ideating tool. 

 

 

(Account removed) Jan 12, 2017

Hey Han,
So in this matrix, is the numerical value something that you put in in your opinion, or is it something that is related to what the people interviewed thinks - just not sure!
Otherwise, where is this located in your drive? Definitely think that this is also something the Fiji team can look at when trying to rate issues!

Reply 0

Hannah Daghighi Jan 15, 2017

Hey Danx! The rating that we give is based off a combination of our opinion and research collated from different online sources as well as raw interview and survey data. It is located in our Ideate folder

Reply 0

Hannah Daghighi Jan 15, 2017

Anything you would add or remove? Looking for feedback at this stage to perfect it

Reply 0

(Account removed) Jan 18, 2017

The Fiji teams suggestion was having a specific weighting for each criteria on the left so that the more important criteria stands out when they all get their ratings and also improve the final score (make one or more stand out over the rest). It's also another way to standardise any biases that can be inputted for the rating - ie personal opinions and research!

Reply 1

(Account removed) Jan 18, 2017

Literally just read Remdog basically said the same thing - Go with his!

Reply 1

View all replies (4)

Remi van der Stok Jan 16, 2017

Hey Han,

I like it, it looks good. Just a few things, is there a weighting to each of the criteria on the left? It might be a useful thing to add as some of them would be more important than others and hence should have a greater impact on the final score.
Making a standardized scale could be a useful way to back up the reasoning behind each number. Another criteria I would add is resource availability.
Good to see a lot of our ideas up there.

Reply 0

Hannah Daghighi Jan 17, 2017

Thanks Remi! We were discussing different methods of weighting as a team and yours seems to be the best option, will definitely implement it. Resource availability is a good one as well.

Reply 0

Matthew Cascio Jan 20, 2017

Updated feasibility matrix with weightings showing a few of our top rated ideas

Reply 2

Ciaran Hoare Jan 23, 2017

This is really good! I think it needs some improvements however. For one, Crowdicity allows all users to vote on ideas and solutions developed by everyone, and you should aim to convey all your relevant ideas along with supplementary information in order for a much larger community than just your team to make an informed decision or analysis of your idea.
I also think your weightings can't be applied across all the sections you've identified in the left hand column. For example, your solution isn't really a viable solution without a product market fit, but your weighting system implies that having the energy output of your solution is 2.5x more important that the product market fit. In that respect I believe some of the categories are subsets of others.

Reply 0

Hannah Daghighi Jan 23, 2017

Thanks Ciaran this is some really valuable feedback. Will make sure to convey the idea more cohesively and include more information in future. I like your point about subsets, discussed it with the team and thinking of making more distinct criteria so there is less overlap, and including subsets in a description format that would go alongside each criteria.

Reply 0

Ciaran Hoare Jan 23, 2017

Another vital point is how much your intended user values each of the criteria points. How much does someone in Siem Reap value the cost of a product compared to its power output. For what are you really designing? And how does this tie in with your problem definition. As you know this is the essence behind the design thinking process, allowing the user to determine the product rather than assigning value to that as a member outside of the community. This is also key to the impact assessment, who are you asking - but then who are you not asking, and what impact could that potentially have on not only the appropriateness of your end product but the community... as in, having a tailored product to a particular cohort of the immediate community.

How have you come up with weightings? and how have you come up with the score out of 10? If they're decided through group discussion and team opinions, you may have issues trying to consider all ideas in a standardised manner. Each of us comes into project with a set of assumptions so you really need to test those assumptions with users to fully understand whether a potential solution is viable.
For each idea Is there a need? Is there a want? and can it be afforded?

Reply 0

View all replies (2)

Amber Johnston Jun 20, 2017

Status changed to IDEA - Time to vote!

Reply 0

Georgie Scott Jul 10, 2017

Perhaps we can use something like this to evaluate our options for the MVP?

Users tagged:

Reply 0

Krystal Kennedy Jul 12, 2017

Following Hannah’s ‘Ideating Tool - Feasibility Matrix’ post, the July Fuel Assessment team (Fiji) has implemented this feasibility matrix when deciding upon which product to prototype from our identified alternatives and, as mentioned, provide a more standardised method to comparison.

In our feasibility document in MS Excel, we first established key criteria that were of importance and gave them a weighting (as a percentage) as some parameters were deemed more important than others such as overall cost and health risk mitigation. See screenshot below for reference.

The following column headers contain the alternatives which are distributed across the sheets by category i.e. stoves, fuels and other so we are not comparing apples with oranges, so to speak.

The corresponding values for each of the parameters is a rating out of 5 and is visually enhanced through conditional formatting. Some columns have been hidden as they contain the calculation from converting the rating out of 5 to the overall percentage, taking into account the weighting in the second column. From here, the overall percentage is calculated through a simple sum (hidden).

Through this process, the Fuel Assessment team has decided upon initial prototyping of the Berkeley Rocket Stove and Chulha from the stoves comparison.

Hopefully our method provides some guidance for future teams when during prototyping. Let us know if you have any further questions.

Reply 1

Ciaran Hoare Jul 13, 2017

Hey Krystal,
Looks good! You could add another row for cultural fit/norms (it may not change the outcome in this case), and your weightings don't necessarily need to add to 100, as they are just relative to one another.
If you're then doing prototyping/testing you can use this as a template for community engagement and seek to prove or disprove your assumptions in the weightings you have assigned.

Reply 1

Krystal Kennedy Jul 18, 2017

Hi Ciaran,

I definitely like the idea of the template for community engagement and the challenging of our assumptions.

For your previous suggestion for other categories, our group did take aspects such as cultural fit into consideration prior to drafting the matrix. However, we agreed upon only considering aspects that differed between the options that we were comparing as we saw the options as roughly equal for aspects e.g. cultural fit (although that is debatable).

Thanks for your suggestions!

Reply 2

View all replies (2)

Hamish Brewer 6 months ago

The project Everest is the project dealing with the biggest height and the tourist functioning by the form of the ventures and think tanks. The topic of the discussion is essaymama where the ideating data is whole basic and useless in the meaning of the world.

Reply 0