This tool can be used to address any problem as it helps in prioritizing solutions to be implemented after an idea generation process.

Before starting to put the ideas (written on sticky notes such as post its) into the tool, it is important for the participants to have knowledge of the whole picture of the problem they are working on, to effectively qualify an idea as feasible or not feasible, for example. If that is not possible, the person conducting the meeting should leave space for discussions after the sticky notes are placed in the template.

If possible, it is important that there are all stakeholders at the same table but it is not necessary.

The set up for the activity depends on how many people are involved and separated in how many groups. Ideally every participant should have a chair and every group a working table. If you are doing the activity in smaller groups, they should not be more than 6 people at each table.

The time commitment for the activity itself is around 1 (one) hour.

1. Start by printing out the template  for each team. Ideally you print it in A2 or A3 size.

2. First ask the group to write the ideas on sticky notes. Make sure to explain that they should write 1 idea per sticky note. If you have different groups, each group receives the same ideas.

3. Once they finish writing, introduce them to the Idea Selection template. Explain that they must place the sticky notes with their ideas on the quadrant they feel are more connected and representative of the idea. To place the sticky notes, they should assess each idea answering the following questions:

Is this idea feasible, can it be implemented?

If the answer is yes, the question will be placed on the right side of the matrix.

Is this idea original, has it not been done before?

If the answer to this question is also yes, according to the perspective of the team, then this idea will be placed on the top right. Otherwise, it should be placed on the bottom right. Similarly, ideas not assessed as feasible can be divided into the top left and bottom left squares according to their originality.

The group can either discuss each idea and come to a shared understanding while placing it or the group members can place ideas based on their individual assessment and the group can review and discuss each idea at the end. Make sure to reserve enough time for these discussions as people will have different perspectives on feasibility and originality of ideas. It is also important to decide (either you as the facilitator or the group) if people will vote on which or where the idea should be placed or if you need a consensus to move to the next idea. No matter what approach you choose, keep in mind that everyone should feel heard and contemplated to ensure buy-in and ownership for the process and future implementation.

4. Once everyone is done, explain that your focus going forward will be on the ideas that were added to the top right square. These ideas are called “ideas that will make an impact” in the tool.

If you are working with several groups, it can be very useful to have each team present their “ideas that will make an impact” and to compare among the different teams. A good idea is to rank ideas, depending on how many teams identified them as “feasible and original”. 

5. Before you end the session, make sure to explain to all participants what is going to happen next with these ideas and how they can be involved. At the end, thank everyone for their contribution.

This model can be implemented by small or big groups. If you have more than 6 people participating, divide the participants into smaller groups. Each group should have 3-6 participants. Ideally, each group should have a working table and be able to work without being influenced by the conversations on other tables.

You can also do this activity online, using Jamboard, Miro or any other online collaboration tool.  

Ideally, the tool is used synchronously, although it could be adapted for asynchronous conversations too.

If you have a lot of ideas to qualify, you might want to adapt the process as to give different smaller teams different ideas and present their qualification in the big group afterwards.

The amount of guidance needed depends on the profile of participants. Some might feel more comfortable in this decision making, whereas others might need to be encouraged to follow their gut feeling, whenever they lack information.

The one part that shouldn’t be changed is the 4 quadrants of the tool.