{"id":2211,"date":"2015-03-26T00:01:06","date_gmt":"2015-03-26T04:01:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/terrencemetz.com\/?p=2211"},"modified":"2026-04-21T13:45:58","modified_gmt":"2026-04-21T17:45:58","slug":"payoff-matrix","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mgrush.com\/blog\/payoff-matrix\/","title":{"rendered":"Payoff Matrix — Quick Wins, Tried and True, or Hail Mary Passes"},"content":{"rendered":"

Quick Wins are found in the Payoff Matrix shown in the \u201ctwo by two\u201d below provides the classic means of prioritizing your options. Using return (i.e., Impact of the Solution) and investment (i.e., Cost of Implementation, typically time or money) as the criteria dimensions, it sorts your options into one of four categories:<\/h2>\n
    \n
  1. Quick Win (aka, Quick Hit)<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Major Opportunity<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Special Effort<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Time Waster<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
    \"Return<\/a>

    Return on Investment Payoff Matrix<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

    <\/h3>\n

    Alternative Payoff Matrix<\/h3>\n

    Perhaps a more engaging and stimulating way to frame the options with a Payoff Matrix substitutes the Probability of Success for the investment or cost dimension. If so, the alternative Payoff Matrix would include the following labels:<\/span><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Quick Win<\/span><\/li>\n
    2. Tried and True<\/span><\/li>\n
    3. Wild and Crazy<\/span><\/li>\n
    4. Hail Mary Pass<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \"Probability<\/a>

      Probability-Based Payoff Matrix<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/div>\n

      <\/h3>\n

      Method for Building a Payoff Matrix<\/strong><\/h3>\n

      Once you have built your options, code them onto small Post-It\u00ae notes. Alpha coding (i.e., A, B, C, etc.) is preferred to numeric coding (i.e., 1, 2, 3, etc.) because it denies subtle bias<\/a> about relative importance that is implied when using numbers. Consider iconic<\/a> coding as an alternative to strip away all possible bias<\/a> (i.e., \u271a, \u2662, \u2707, etc.).<\/span><\/p>\n

      Place your matrix criteria on a large whiteboard. Begin by facilitating from the zero point, or middle of the matrix. Then work one dimension (criteria) at a time, asking if it is more or less than other options previously posted. Complete when the group can support the entire array.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Alternative<\/em><\/span><\/h4>\n

      Break your team into three groups and have each group complete their own coding, probably on a large sheet<\/a> (i.e., 50cm * 75cm), and bring all three Payoff Matrices to the front. Create a fourth and final Payoff Matrix by merging the three, facilitating discussion about the differences until the group can support the final array.<\/span><\/p>\n

      Next Steps<\/em><\/span><\/h4>\n

      Complete your prioritization<\/a> effort with two more steps: assign roles and responsibilities<\/a> for further development and conduct a Guardian of Change<\/a> to agree on what participants will tell others after your meeting has concluded.<\/span><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      In a world where everyone can engage in decisions that affect them<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

      ______<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

      Lead the Change\u2014One Meeting at a Time<\/b><\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

      Are you ready to transform how decisions are made, problems are solved, and alignment is built in your organization?<\/span><\/p>\n

      True meeting leadership goes beyond setting an agenda.<\/b> It requires a facilitator who can navigate complexity, balance voices, and drive toward outcomes with clarity and consensus. Our Professional Meeting Leadership Workshop<\/b><\/a> and facilitation training equips you to do just that\u2014blending human-centric methods<\/b> with structured analytical tools<\/b> to foster rigor, inclusivity, and results that stick.<\/span><\/p>\n