Slimgim Basics: Estimating per factor likelihood of change
‘Likelihood’ is what you use to estimate the probability of success for each factor. Learn how to measure it the Slimgim way.
Please read the previous article Slimgim Basics: Assessing geospatial maturity factors that introduced:
- What Slimgim is
- Who should lead your assessment
- What the 5 stages of maturity are
- The Slimgim way of assessing maturity with three hows; how consistently, how well & how broadly.
In this short how to article, you’ll learn how to estimate likelihood the Slimgim way.
like·li·hood
the state or fact of something’s being likely;
probability.
The Slimgim measure of likelihood
What is your appetite for change?
This is an estimate of likelihood of improving a factor between this assessment and the next. It is a score ranging from extremely unlikely (1) to extremely likely (5).
When scoring each factor, it’s important to consider three things :
What is the likelihood to improve in “this” assessment time frame?
- For early stage maturity, assessments are typically every 12 months.
- Organizations that are more mature and who have adopted Slimgim maturity as a practice, assessments can occur every 6 months.
What is the realistic level of effort?
- For example, you may be likely to improve a factor but the effort may be significant and not something the organization or your team can maintain focus on.
- Some factors take eons to improve, particularly those you have no control over like leadership’s behavior and their data/geo literacy, organizational culture and competencies.
What is the desire or resistance to change?
- Corporately, consider if there a historical resistance to change as it relates to the factor being measured and overall. Some orgs, quite frankly, are change proof.
- Take into account if there are 1 or 2 people that have enough clout to derail your efforts. Although your team are working on the right things (maturity), some business unit or senior leadership can prevent you from moving the needle on the factor.
The 5 levels are presented on tab A. Getting Started of the Google sheet and excel workbook as:
- Extremely unlikely
- Unlikely
- Neutral
- Likely
- Extremely likely
Adding a measure of likelihood to maturity is unique to Slimgim. Geospatial related maturity models measure… well… only maturity then they stop short.
Slimgim takes your assessment to the next level by giving you the information you need to diagnose organizational health and target areas for improvement.
“Likelihood allows you to focus effort on the right factors.”
Let’s get started.
Estimating likelihood the Slimgim way
To walk you through an assessment, we’ll work with factor 2.1 common to both the base model and Slimgim-T. This factor was also used in the previous article to illustrate how to measure maturity:
2.1 Business units have active EGIS participation
There is active participation and involvement of business units in EGIS activities, implementation, planning, etc.
When assessing this factor, you would take the following under consideration:
What is the likelihood to improve the factor in “this” assessment time frame?
- For those business units that actually do participate, are they committed and delivering on their promises? If not, it takes time to foster participation and buy-in.
- Do they miss meetings often, delay emails, etc? If the participants are exceptionally busy or unreliable, your likelihood to improve this may be hindered by their behavior. Understanding your collaborators is important.
What is the realistic level of effort?
- Even with full participation, how much of your effort and time as a leader will be required to sustain this activity?
What is the desire or resistance to change?
- Is it just 10–20% of the business units that participate or are key stakeholders absent?
- Will it be easy to ramp up active participation or is Calvin or Sara going to get in the way again? How much influence do they have on the group and your efforts?
Tip: What does ‘likely’ look like?
For factor 2.1, if business unit cooperation is already corporate wide, participants park their egos at the door and work towards a common goal (enterprise GIS), then chances are you’ll score at a Level 4 Likely.
How would you estimate factor 2.1 for the following scenario?
Scenario (repeated from Slimgim Basics — Maturity):
Through engagement and collaboration, you’ve established a handful of data working groups and a schedule of regular collaborations. Managers were on board during initial discussion.
Unfortunately, you could kick-off only 1 of the 4 groups (business unit managers enthusiasm waned the second initial discussions concluded). At the very first or just prior to the kick-off meeting March 1st of this year, 3 of the 4 the working groups claimed they were too busy to participate and recommended “let’s just start this early next year. ‘Trust us’. We’re fully on board, we just can’t free up our people for this at the moment.”
The one committed group consisted of employees that were already working together on a data centralization project. The working group was established to try to include key management who indicated they wished to participate, learn and were there to help expedite decisions.
Below is how you would review and assess this factor.
How likely in this time frame?
The existing employees that worked together before, simply continued participating at the same level effort (this is a good thing).
Management came to the first meeting then promptly stopped attending. Funny thing was, they continued to report to upper management that things were progressing well.
Note: Leave a comment below if this behavior is affecting your efforts. Our peers need to know they aren’t alone.
How consistently: 3 Neutral
Most participants bailed but they do seem to have a will to participate…um, later. Although the single participating working group is inconsistent, it is felt this could be improved but all things considered (those manager’s), likelihood to improve overall is not highly likely.
Realistic level of effort?
Improving business unit participation requires a change in behavior driven by buy-in. They need to see the value in participating in “your GIS effort” differently and so you need to change mindset. This requires a significant investment in time and for the geospatial team to manage and drive the change.
How well: 2 Unlikely
The same participants continue to stay involved but it is apparent that to get other business units and managers committed will be a significant effort likely requiring top-down buy-in and direction.
What is desire or resistance to change?
Easy to estimate. Only one of the three working groups made it off the ground… partially. Managers from the first group did a bait and switch in order to report that they’re involved. In actuality they’re not. Although resistance to change is not outwardly apparent, the behavior is undeniable. No one except the core group is committed to participating in GIS activities.
Desire to change: 1 Extremely Unlikely
Final Factor 2.1 likelihood score
2.1 Business units have active EGIS participation
There is active participation and involvement of business units in EGIS activities, implementation, planning, etc.
After considering how likely this factor can be improved in the assessment time frame, how much effort it would take and business unit participants desire to change and improve, you would estimate Likelihood at Level 2 — Unlikely.
… repeat the process for each factor.
In the next Slimgim Basics, I will show you how to add your baseline values so you can start measuring your performance.
“Likelihood allows you to focus effort on the right factors.”
Please follow. Claps & likes appreciated. Troll-free comments welcome.
Subscribe to the Mass Maturity / Slimgim newsletter to get notification when I post new content and to learn more.
