Lesson Outcomes
By the end of this lesson, you will be able to:
- Explain the purpose of criteria when comparing solutions.
- Identify appropriate criteria for an effective solution.
- Distinguish between essential and desirable criteria.
- Apply weighting to criteria.
- Use a weighted-decision model to rank proposed solutions.
Lesson Overview
Generating several possible solutions gives you options, but you still need a structured way to compare them.
Before selecting a solution, you need to decide what makes a solution effective. You then establish criteria, assign appropriate weights and use those weights to rank the alternatives.
The Learner Guide identifies criteria such as feasibility, time, cost, resource implications, stakeholder commitment and logistics.
Main Lesson Content
Why Do We Need Criteria?
Imagine that a team has generated five possible solutions to the same problem.
Without clear criteria, people may choose based on:
- Personal preference
- Intuition
- Cost alone
- The easiest option
- The idea suggested by the most influential person
A better approach is to establish standards against which you can compare the alternatives.
Criteria give you a clear picture of what an effective solution should achieve and help guide the search for suitable solutions.
Defining an Effective Solution
Before comparing alternatives, ask:
What would an effective solution need to achieve?
An effective solution should:
- Provide an acceptable level of benefits.
- Deal effectively with obstacles or causes.
- Meet time, space, manpower and material constraints.
- Be affordable and cost-effective.
- Be acceptable to people affected by the solution.
- Be acceptable to those who must approve it.
- Be acceptable to those providing the required resources.
- Be practical for those who must implement it.
- Involve an acceptable level of risk.
These characteristics help you create your criteria.
Must-Have and Desirable Criteria
Not every criterion has the same importance.
The Learner Guide distinguishes between criteria that the solution must have and those that would be desirable but are not essential.
Must-Have
A solution cannot be considered suitable if it fails this criterion.
Example:
A new system must comply with organisational policy.
Would-Like
A solution that meets this criterion would be preferable, but the organisation could still accept an alternative that does not.
Example:
The new system should be easy to use.
This distinction prevents a solution from receiving a high overall score simply because it performs well in areas that are less important.
Common Criteria
The Learner Guide identifies several criteria that you can use when comparing proposed solutions.
| Criterion | Question to Ask |
|---|---|
| Feasibility | Can we realistically implement it? |
| Time | How long will implementation take? |
| Cost | Can we afford it? |
| Resources | What people, equipment or materials will we need? |
| Stakeholder commitment | Will the relevant people support it? |
| Logistics | Can we practically organise and implement it? |
You do not need to use every criterion for every decision.
Choose criteria that relate directly to the problem and the circumstances.
Weighting the Criteria
Some criteria matter more than others.
For example, suppose a company is choosing a new production system.
It may consider:
- Cost
- Reliability
- Implementation time
- Ease of use
If reliability is critical, it should carry more weight than ease of use.
Example
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| Reliability | 40% |
| Cost | 30% |
| Implementation time | 20% |
| Ease of use | 10% |
| Total | 100% |
The weights show the relative importance of each criterion.
The most important criteria receive the greatest weighting.
The Weighted-Decision Model
The Learner Guide recommends a weighted-decision model for complex decisions involving large amounts of information. It provides a more systematic approach than relying only on rules or intuition.
A simple process is:
Step 1: Identify the alternatives
List the solutions you want to compare.
Step 2: Identify the criteria
Decide what characteristics matter when comparing the alternatives.
Step 3: Assign weights
Give each criterion a weighting based on its importance.
Step 4: Score each alternative
Score each solution against every criterion.
Step 5: Calculate the weighted scores
Multiply the score for each criterion by its weighting.
Step 6: Add the scores
The resulting total provides a structured basis for ranking the alternatives.
Worked Example
A company wants to reduce delays in customer service.
The team has generated three possible solutions:
- Solution A: Hire another employee.
- Solution B: Introduce a digital ticketing system.
- Solution C: Redesign the existing workflow.
The team establishes four criteria:
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| Cost | 30% |
| Implementation time | 20% |
| Effectiveness | 35% |
| Resource requirements | 15% |
| Total | 100% |
The team scores each solution from 1 to 5, where:
1 = very poor
5 = excellent
Initial Scores
| Solution | Cost | Time | Effectiveness | Resources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A – Hire employee | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 |
| B – Digital system | 2 | 2 | 5 | 2 |
| C – Redesign workflow | 5 | 4 | 4 | 5 |
Now apply the weighting.
Weighted Scores
For Solution A:
- Cost: 3 × 30 = 90
- Time: 4 × 20 = 80
- Effectiveness: 4 × 35 = 140
- Resources: 3 × 15 = 45
Total = 355
The same calculation applies to the other alternatives.
The important point is that the weighting prevents every criterion from having equal influence.
Ranking the Solutions
Once you calculate the weighted totals, you can rank the alternatives.
For example:
| Solution | Weighted Total | Rank |
|---|---|---|
| Solution A | 355 | 2 |
| Solution B | 315 | 3 |
| Solution C | 420 | 1 |
Solution C ranks highest according to the criteria and weights used.
However, a high score does not automatically mean that you should implement the solution.
You still need to evaluate the solution against the established criteria and consider constraints, risks and possible consequences. That evaluation forms the focus of KT3.
Consider What Could Go Wrong
The Learner Guide reminds you to consider contingencies when developing criteria.
Ask:
What could go wrong?
Consider factors that could interfere with the success of a solution.
For example:
- What if the person responsible lacks the required experience?
- What if legislation changes?
- What if organisational policies change?
- What if targets increase?
- What if an obstacle becomes more difficult?
- What if a new obstacle appears?
- Could the solution create an additional opportunity?
Thinking about these issues early helps you develop more realistic criteria.
A Practical Decision Matrix
You can present the weighted-decision model as a simple decision matrix:
| Criteria | Weight | Solution A | Solution B | Solution C |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cost | 30% | 3 | 2 | 5 |
| Time | 20% | 4 | 2 | 4 |
| Effectiveness | 35% | 4 | 5 | 4 |
| Resources | 15% | 3 | 2 | 5 |
This makes the comparison transparent.
It also makes it easier to explain why one solution ranks higher than another.
Important Principle
A weighted model does not replace judgement.
It gives you a systematic basis for comparison.
The quality of the decision still depends on:
- Choosing appropriate criteria.
- Giving realistic weights.
- Using reasonable scores.
- Considering constraints.
- Considering risks.
- Considering stakeholder requirements.
- Checking whether the highest-ranked option actually suits the situation.
Key Notes / Lesson Summary
- Establish criteria before selecting a solution.
- Define what an effective solution should achieve.
- Separate must-have criteria from desirable criteria.
- Common criteria include feasibility, time, cost, resources, stakeholder commitment and logistics.
- Give greater weight to criteria that matter more.
- A weighted-decision model provides a systematic way to compare alternatives.
- Calculate weighted scores and use the totals to rank solutions.
- Consider what could go wrong before making the final decision.
- A high score provides guidance; it does not remove the need for judgement.