With data transformation, each piece of data or single cell might be decomposed into another layer. Amplify this approach even further by splitting your four cells into sixteen.

Therefore, see the chart below. We can now ask, generate, and record sixteen pieces of information on a large Post-It® for each assignment. Note how we take the four basic criteria below and expand them into four additional details (for illustrative purposes only). 

Other Best Practices articles instructed that one key to facilitating effective analysis mandates the facilitator to ask open-ended questions, not simple, close-ended (i.e., yes or no) confirmations. For example, and pardon the simplicity, do not ask “Does the sport of curling involve any sweat?” Someone will make a compelling argument that it does, albeit minimal perhaps. The superior question, simply re-phrased:  “To what extent does the sport of curling involve sweat? (a lot, little, or somewhere in between)”.

When building a roles and responsibilities matrix for example, the classic approach identifies who is going to be ‘Responsible’ for some apportioned activity or assignment, and the appropriate single cell is given a large, red “R”.  At minimum you might ask four questions, such as:

1. What role will be responsible for this assignment? (e.g., Business Analyst)
2. When will we reach completion? (e.g., date specific)
3. How much financial resources will be required to complete it? (eg, $,$$$)
4. What is the estimated FTE required to bring it to completion? (FTE = full-time equivalent, such as 0.25 which is one person, full-time, for three months)

Power of the Single Cell

1. What role will be responsible for this assignment? (e.g., RASI Chart)

   1. What role is ultimately being held Accountable and paying for this initiative? (e.g., EVP)
   2. What role will be Responsible for this assignment? (e.g., Business Analyst)
   3. What roles will be Supporting this assignment? (e.g., Project Manager)
   4. What roles need to be Informed about this assignment? (e.g., Customer)

2. At what estimated point in time will we reach completion? (e.g., date specific)

   1. When does concerted effort begin? (e.g., date specific)
   2. What is the projected halfway point? (e.g., date specific)
   3. At what estimated point in time will completion be final? (e.g., date specific)
   4. When will the effort be reviewed such as Retrospective or Look Back? (e.g., date specific)

3. How much financial resources will be required to complete it? (eg, $,$$$)

   1. What are the estimated research costs? (e.g., $,$$$)
   2. What are the estimated acquisition costs? (e.g., $,$$$)
   3. What are the estimated operational costs? (e.g., $,$$$)
   4. What are the estimated termination costs? (e.g., $,$$$)

4. What is the estimated FTP required to bring it to completion? (FTP = full-time person, such as 0.25 which is one person, full-time, for three months)

   1. What maximum number of people work at the same time? (e.g., Quantity)
   2. Call on which special subject matter experts? (e.g., Title[s])
   3. How much FTP will bring it to completion? (e.g., FTP)
   4. Codify any special issues not described above. (narrative, perhaps coded)

Having left a meeting can be comforting because the amount of detail described above is substantial, but knowing that it was consensually built and is now owned by the meeting participants is reassuring. When applied to a project plan, using questions similar to the ones shown above, you will deliver a more detailed GANTT chart than most people build in their cubicles alone. Hand this off to an intern who claims to be an “expert” with Microsoft Project Manager® and tell them to bring you back a full resource-allocated project plan so that you can go on to your next meeting.

______

Don’t ruin your career by hosting bad meetings. Sign up for a workshop or send this to someone who should. MGRUSH workshops focus on meeting design and practice. Each person practices tools, methods, and activities every day during the week. Therefore, while some call this immersion, we call it the road to building high-value facilitation skills.

Our workshops also provide a superb way to earn up to 40 SEUs from the Scrum Alliance, 40 CDUs from IIBA, 40 Continuous Learning Points (CLPs) based on Federal Acquisition Certification Continuous Professional Learning Requirements using Training and Education activities, 40 Professional Development Units (PDUs) from SAVE International, as well as 4.0 CEUs for other professions. (See workshop and Reference Manual descriptions for details.)

Want a free 10-minute break timer? Sign up for our once-monthly newsletter HERE and receive a timer along with four other of our favorite facilitation tools, free.

Related video

• Basic Facilitation Skills: #3 Transform your Roles & Responsibilities Matrix into a Gantt Chart

Facilitation Expert

Terrence Metz, MBA, CSM, CSPF, PSP01, HTTO1, is the Managing Director of MG RUSH Facilitation Leadership, Training, and Meeting Design, an acknowledged leader in structured facilitation training, and author of “Meetings That Get Results – A Facilitator’s Guide to Building Better Meetings.” His FAST Facilitation Best Practices blog features nearly 300 articles on facilitation skills and tools aimed at helping others lead meetings that produce clear and actionable results. His clients include Agilists, Scrum teams, program and project managers, senior officers, and the business analyst community among numerous private and public companies and global corporations. As an undergraduate of Northwestern University (Evanston, IL) and an MBA graduate from NWU’s Kellogg School of Management, his professional experience has focused on process improvement and product development. He continually aspires to make it easier for others to succeed.