ࡱ> :9 Fɀ`\p Larry Donahue Ba==x78X@"1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1 Arial1 Arial1$Arial1 Arial1Arial1QTahoma1QTahoma1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial1Arial"$"#,##0_);\("$"#,##0\)!"$"#,##0_);[Red]\("$"#,##0\)""$"#,##0.00_);\("$"#,##0.00\)'""$"#,##0.00_);[Red]\("$"#,##0.00\)7*2_("$"* #,##0_);_("$"* \(#,##0\);_("$"* "-"_);_(@_).))_(* #,##0_);_(* \(#,##0\);_(* "-"_);_(@_)?,:_("$"* #,##0.00_);_("$"* \(#,##0.00\);_("$"* "-"??_);_(@_)6+1_(* #,##0.00_);_(* \(#,##0.00\);_(* "-"??_);_(@_)"Yes";"Yes";"No""True";"True";"False""On";"On";"Off"],[$ -2]\ #,##0.00_);[Red]\([$ -2]\ #,##0.00\) 0.0%                + ) , *       x " @ / 0@ x"@@ / x"@ / x " @ / x""@ @ /  x""@ @ / 8""@ @  x @ /  x / 0 0 @ 0  p@ p  @ 8@@ 0@ p  @ 8@@ 8!@@ 0!@ p ! @ 0"@ @ 0"@ @ 0"!@ @ x"@ @ / p@ @ 0@ @ 0!@ @ x"@@ / x"@ / 0 0"@@ 0"@ 0 " @  x@@/  x  @/     x@@ x@ @ p@ @ Z0"@ Z0"@ @ Z0" @ 8@ 0@ 0 p  0"@ 8!@@    `T!Evaluation Criteria!54Balancing Portfolio Graph LStrategic Considerations  ;  ; TfVf@ @p4 3 A@@  ??ScoreWeighted ScoreEvaluation criterionWeight % Project ScoreElementsFactors IdentifiedCustomer Focused ViewpointOrganized RelationshipP Customers affected (I = Internal, E = External, B = Both Internal and External)dWill Inititative result in an organized relationship of the process (consolidated process approach)?Streamlined Processes.Will initiative streamline existing processes?Eliminate Duplication AWill initiative reduce duplication of work, processes, or effort?Resolve Data Integrity Issues <Will initiative assist in resolving data integrity problems?Single Source Information WWill initiative enable the capture or distribution of information from a single source?Programming Required )Will initiative require programming time?Strategic ConsiderationsWeighted ScalesEffect on CustomersUrgency of NeedoCost of Implementing - Total cost to implement, including training, outside resources & documentation. zTechnical Fit - Degree at which initiative is compatible with our existing technology, processes and/or policies. ITime to Implement - Complete time, including training & documentation. Value Score Risk ScoreValueRisk Bubble SizeMidptMax InitiativeM0  6 or more Months 1  3 or more Months 3  1 to 3 Months 5  Under 30 DaysChance of Success - The probability the initiative will be completed, delivered on-time and on-budget, and meet planned ROI/benefits?%0  Negative 2  Neutral 5  Positive50  Unknown / Little 2  Somewhat Certain 5  CertainU0  No / Unknown 2  Moderate (>10% Customer Base) 5  Extensive (>60% Customer Base)X0  None / Unknown 2  Moderate (>$50k w/in 2 years) 5  Extensive (>$500k w/in 2 years)T0  Unknown / Significant Modifications 2  Some Modifications 5  Perfect Fit.0  None / Little 2  Somewhat 5  Significantf0  Unknown Benefit / Test 1  Ease of Use 3  Increase Effeciency 5  Compliance/Legal/Uptime/Bug Fixt0  Unknown / Little / "Next Big Thing" 2  Somewhat (>15% competitors have) 5  Significant (>75% competitors have)Strategic Fit : Customer Retention / Referability - Will this project lead to improved customer retention or additional referrals via customer service levels or new product offering?1 Strategic Fit : Operational Effeciencies - Will we save money and/or enable company to expand without additional expense with more customers?( Strategic Fit : Product Offering Viability - Improves competitive position? Do all of our competitors offer it? Is there a chance we can be a leader with this process/product?* T0  Unknown / Extensive (>$25,000) 2  Moderate (<$10,000) 5  Little / None (<$500) RationaleFinancial Return (ROI) - Will this project provide on ongoing financial benefit greater than it's cost (looking at a 2-year time period)?=Developer Cost = $75/hr NOC Cost = $75/hr Todd Cost = $125/hrfROI = (Payback-Investment) -------------------------------- * 100 InvestmentScore-based Decision MatrixUse this Decision Matrix when it is possible to create objective scores and/or want to run a more rigerous analysis against competing options.iTitle of Factor #1 - Description of Factor. Use language, such that a higher score "is better."<Backup your score, and the weight % you assign this Factor.JPut in OBJECTIVE scores, to minimize disputes with respect to the scoring.Weights must sum to 100Value-based ObjectivesRisk-based Objectives!The higher the score, the better& Bu .k]z  | Fɀ &/  dMbP?_*+%.+&LFatcow Web Hosting, LLC&C&D&RCONFIDENTIALMHP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 6 (?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 62'xeK.Aϩ˫1'Ң0roGA!6 &v`؁]XOHwnNխ[R_%n\&e6P!;(Cia(uCF5+[P&Ie5t=hh=#!rp2^x#l+7ϐOA> C; K)%#}6Mburo" gdzkMt e>gvގ_;Ӵ/=K0vCly%XdFitC:oBx"FXX??U} } 0}  } I"} I }  } } #} $   @             @             @ @6A BBB C7 CC BBB'::::  4 42    D85 F9~ (3@&) DD H< 1:  ;4  <=  ;5  <<= E3 66~ +.@&, DDG 2( *. 66~ +.@,( LLG 2)   */ 66~ +.@,(G 2-# !  %  H  *0 66~ +$@ ,( G 2+# @S@ %  H O 77~ /@ 0(  I 3, J% KK~ L@ M  G= N' - 66~ +@ ,  G 2&   * 66~ +@ ,  G 211 !4@% % RB * 66~ +@, I 2*# 4@ %  . 77~ /@0 3$ 8 999#  % P;#PY@4C % H PQ Q>&+@(,TlaeyWE$  >   C (  R  C A@  ]` ZR  C A@ ]` ~~  <4|XPP?b  ]4@4|< ,jL>v$  <!Larry Donahue: Higher is better!< V  Y ri~~  <|XPP?bz]4@|4 9YeEpITF=~ < Larry Donahue: Lower is better!< M  @   Larry Donahue   Larry Donahue >@:    7 Fɀ 9i;  dMbP?_*+%.+&LFatcow Web Hosting, LLC&C&D&RCONFIDENTIALMHP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 6?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 62'xeK.Aϩ˫1'Ң0roGA!6 &v`؁]XOHwnNխ[R_%n\&e6P!;(Cia(uCF5+[P&Ie5t=hh=#!rp2^x#l+7ϐOA> C; K)%#}6Mburo" gdzkMt e>gvގ_;Ӵ/=K0vCly%XdFitC:oBx"dXX??U    #4@ Z  #Z ~ $@ !$@  D@C@  D~ $@ "4@ Z @S@ Z ~ $@ <*^b$   t \(  j  0NMM?]`  FɀMHP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 6?dXXLetter.HP LaserJet 5000 Series PCL 62%xeK.DA_u˫1iޏ ` X@OG"2h=+l ̼U7F :ul /{w\|~ ';8!q0l²!89p : ]FQ#- #NÞ x =N+[;xC&@_D߅_` V % la7ڃ(xo2JBg8&9Igby;v.}>+2vՃ&, v]>fr'B"dXX??3` #` #` #` #0 (   ^B  c $D@Jc ]`f^B  c $D@ ]`?п)3d23 M NM4 3Q  InitiativeQ ;Q ;Q ;3_ O   MM<4E4D $% M 3O&Q4$% M 3O&Q4FA ` 3O. 3*#M43*#M4% AM3O&Q  Risk'4% HMZ3O+&Q Value'4523 M ̙/43d" 44% VS,M =3O&Q 4Project Name (ProjectID)'4PP PZaajkR R j jT TQ(Q%  nHM1Q Q3QQO2QQQQQ'kkQ Q4U U% M13OQ'4S S 4eeLF@@C@@S@e f^B  c $D@  ]`0f^B @ c $D@  ]`ll  s * A@  K]` <No Go!< + 4rr  0X A@ 0]`X  < Priority!< 2 4>@7 Fɀ  MO  dMbP?_*+%"??U} $ } } :} $      >? " #  $  $  $  $  $  $ % &>@   7 Oh+'0HPh Larry DonahuexLarry DonahuexMicrosoft Excel@:8@R@@ס՜.+,D՜.+, PXt | GFatcow Web HostingA Evaluation CriteriaBalancing Portfolio GraphStrategic Considerations''Balancing Portfolio Graph'!Print_Area!'Evaluation Criteria'!Print_Area  Worksheets Named RangesL@+C_AdHocReviewCycleID_EmailSubject _AuthorEmail_AuthorEmailDisplayName_PreviousAdHocReviewCycleIDiOJd'Initiatives Evaluation Matrix v3.0.xlsldonahue@fatcow.netLarry Donahuew.T(9  !"#$%&'(*+,-./02345678Root Entry FWorkbook PSummaryInformation()DocumentSummaryInformation81