|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
|
|
Index
|
|
Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heuristic Matrices
Heuristic simply means "that which points-out or indicates", and for our Quality Improvement initiatives, a Matrix is simply a table of actual observation, conclusion and logic or planning. Well-organized Heuristic Matrices represent a particularly powerful strategy for examining and understanding. Their usefulness spans the gamut from investigative initiatives to the very practical implementation of higher-order planning or expertise (particularly when used to support performance on-the-job, as with job-aids (i.e. an alternative-to/ support-of traditional training interventions)). This explains why a well-designed Matrix can be an invaluable practical tool both before and after data collection. Matrices can help to uncover biases in our data and in our thinking, and they help us to theorize as to the exact nature of the situation we are examining or planning for. Below is a Generic Matrix. Simply answer the questions and fill in the boxes that may apply to your scenario.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generic Matrix: Sample template indicating the contents of each cell
|
|
|
|
|
|
GENERIC
MATRIX
EXAMPLE |
Yes/ Is/ Positive |
No/ Is Not/ Negative |
Therefore... or
Delta?... or
Difference?... or
So What? |
| Who? |
Who are the actors? Who is "in"? |
Who is not directly involved (but who may reasonably have been expected to be)?... or,
Who is against? |
How did this happen?
Why is this so?
How do "they" fit-in? |
| What kind? |
What is it like, both qualitatively and quantitatively? |
What is it not like, though one may reasonably suspect it to be like? |
What could cause this?
What does this typify?
What is it really like? |
| Where? |
Where does it occur? |
Where does it not occur, though it might reasonably be expected to? |
Why might this be so? |
| When? |
When does it occur?
(Look for patterns related to both time and sequence.) |
When does it not occur, though one may reasonably expect it to? |
What may explain this? |
| So? (Conclusions) |
What does the above mean? |
What does the above mean? |
What does the above mean? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
An example of how this kind of Matrix can be adapted to specific endeavours, can be seen if we apply the technique to a sample investigation. Similar modalities can be used to investigate the effects of people, processes, inputs and other equipment, on the operational functioning of virtually any kind of business or enterprise. The creation of your customized heuristic matrix begins with an inventory of discernable evidence or (when absolutely necessary), of accepted theory or logic. The next step is to apply logical tests to the questions and evidence at hand, in a consistent and unbiased fashion. Where the results are inconclusive, users can then attempt (with extreme caution), to prioritize or rank-order their findings, in order to guide further research efforts. The result of using a heuristic matrix is frequently a "working theory", which may not be true in its first rendition. However, these efforts are sure to be guided toward finding the truth of the matter at hand - in as much as that may be possible or knowable at all. So, for a (radically) simplified example, consider...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who Stole the Cookies from the Cookie Jar?
INVESTIGATIVE
MATRIX
EXAMPLE |
Motive |
Opportunity |
Ability |
| Bobby |
Bobby dislikes peanut butter cookies, which constitutes the bulk of the stolen sweets.
LOW MOTIVE |
Bobby was in the kitchenette area, and may have had a chance to sneak into the cookie jar, since he was seen climbing up onto the countertop.
MODERATE OPPORTUNITY |
Bobby is able to reach the cookie jar, but was seen just as he was climbing up onto the countertop.
The question is; Was he able to have taken the cookies during that period of time? Did he have another unseen opportunity, considering he joined Beth with the finger paints after getting down from the countertop?
POSSIBLE ABILITY
|
| Brenda |
Brenda is keen on all sweets.
MODERATE MOTIVE |
Brenda is scared of heights and would not have been able to reach the cookie jar without climbing up on something.
LOW OPPORTUNITY |
Brenda is not likely to have climbed up and taken the cookies, being scared of heights. Moreover, she was not seen in the kitchen.
LOW ABILITY
|
| Boris |
Boris’s favorite cookie is a peanut butter cookie. Moreover, he had seen the peanut butter cookies being taken from their package, and put into the cookie jar.
HIGH MOTIVATION |
Boris is an avid climber, and he takes pride in hiding well and sneaking around. Though he was not seen in the cookie jar, there remains a high probability that he enjoyed such an opportunity, as there was a distraction with the finger painting going on.
HIGH OPPORTUNITY (tentative/ potential only!) |
Boris may have been somewhat under-supervised during this incident, and certainly was very able to get at the cookies. Boris knew exactly where the cookies were, and is always proud to demonstrate his climbing ability.
DEMONSTRATED ABILITY (YET NOT DIRECTLY SEEN THIS TIME)
|
| Beth |
Beth is diabetic and anaphylactic, and so is not likely to have either stolen or eaten these cookies.
NO MOTIVE |
Beth was not seen in the kitchenette area, and in fact was seen finger-painting during the period in question.
NO OPPORTUNITY |
Since Beth was up to her elbows in finger paint the whole time, and since no finger paint was seen anywhere at the scene of the crime, Beth is not likely to have been able to steel the cookies without making a tell-all mess.
NO ABILITY
|
| So? (Conclusions) |
What does the above mean? The most likely suspect when considering Motive, certainly is Boris, followed closely by Brenda. |
What does the above mean? The most likely suspect, when considering Opportunity, is probably Boris (assuming he snuck in and out unseen, which is possible, considering no one was witnessed in flagrante delicto), followed closely by Bobby, though his attempt failed. |
What does the above mean? While Bobby is a possibility on the Ability parameter, he lacks Motive. Boris is an unknown (this time around) on the Ability score, but only because he was not observed. Boris has climbed up onto the counter before - he has a track record of exactly this kind of thing.
|
| Overall Conclusions? |
Boris is likely the Cookie Thief. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another Classic example of an investigative Matrix, useful during "After-Action Reviews" and other similar "Post-Mortem examinations", employs a three-column Matrix design, with each column containing; 1) Supporting Evidence, 2) Refuting Evidence, and 3) Likely Explanations. The different rows would each detail the different possible scenarios, and the resulting Matrix would enable a singular, bird's-eye view of the preponderance of evidence. To use Matrices in more of a planning capacity, simply list requirements down one axis, and actors along the other. The possibilities are virtually endless. The act of building and filling-in the Matrix Table, often generates new possibilities to consider. This technique can aid in efforts to deconstruct unforeseen scenarios, as well as help us to integrate divergent capabilities and efforts into a coordinated, synergistic and well-executed plan. This is what makes matrices among the most important and useful tools for teamworking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
|
|
Index
|
|
Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
The eManual of Quality Improvement - Synerlux Consulting, 2010. All Rights Reserved.
Adapted for the Internet from 'The Mini-Manual of Quality Improvement' by Ravi Karumanchiri; Toronto, Canada; 1998. ISBN 0-9683060-1-2.
Synerlux Consulting
develops customized
improvement approaches for
diverse enterprises
s p e c i a l i z i n g i n
Manufacturing, Logistics & Administrative Operations
Product Producers, Service Providers, Government Agencies & NGOs
B u i l d i n g E n t e r p r i s e S y n e r g y
www.synerlux.com
|
|
|
|
