By Birger Sevaldson
Impact and Threshold Analyses (IMP-analyses)
(AHO 2013) GIGA-maps are rich and dense information representations. To work with such semi-organised complexities and develop the ideas within and to work with the interventions or innovations derived from the ZIP analyses and the creative process, we must use a series of evaluation tools.
Impact and Threshold Analyses These analyses were developed especially for SOD by the SOD team. To help make decisions for the systems interventions, the value of I points, their implementation and effect, the below evaluation analyses is a good starting point. Evaluate and range all the I points according to the following criteria:
2. Thresholds 2.5 PESTEL 3. Synergies 4. Counter (-inntuitive) effects (unwanted and counter intuitive effects) 5. Resilience
The PUGH Matrix is a similar evaluation method. Read more about it here >>>>>
Application A slider type of graphics is useful for the evaluation. The evaluation can be contextualized on a map, here for evaluating relations. (AHO 2013)
Other types are based on scoring. (Stig M. Henriksen et. al. NTNU 2016)
Here a simpler score system but more factors are included. (Håvard Banne et. al. NYNU 2016)
Another more detajled evaluation map (Julie Grytten et.al. NTNU 2016)
There are many ways to apply the principal. (Julie Grytten et.al. NTNU 2016)
From the Salto Connect project, (2rd year bachelor project, Marie Frogner, Trym Abrahamsen, Oda Heier, Torgeir Hæreid, Julie Sandvoll 2017)
Additional evaluations Pro et Contra analyses. (See "Drøft" by Førland)
Pro et contra argumentation tree. (Stig M. Henriksen NTNU 2016)
Common Risk Evaluation Diagram with Y axis: Consequence and X-axia Probability (M. Aguirre, R. Mikalauskaite, L Blaasvær 2011)
The normal risk analyses diagram can be addapted in many ways. Click image to see larger version. (Jan Kristian Strømsnes, AHO 2011)
(Markus Gundersen NTNU 2016)
From the Salto Connect project, (2rd year bachelor project, Marie Frogner, Trym Abrahamsen, Oda Heier, Torgeir Hæreid, Julie Sandvoll 2017)
Back-checking The design process is not linear; it contains periods of incubation and moments of illumination (Hadarmad). Therefore, the mapping by itself does not always lead to ideas and innovations. Also, furthering the development of ideas into concepts and designs is a process that is not harnessed by the mapping; rather, it is one that most often plays out in conventional design work. It is ok to ‘forget’ the maps and the rich systemic information for times of creative development. To allow this to happen, we have use ‘back-checking’. This means that at the check points, the concept is back-checked with the system represented by the GIGA-maps. This allows for an uninterrupted creative flow.
The image shows backchecking of concepts to the gigamap to trace how the concept connects to the system. (Stig M. Henriksen et. al. NTNU 2016) |