SII Prioritise

Transparent portfolio decisions

Synthetic demo — saved only in this browser. Do not enter client or personal data.

1. Frame the decision

2. Calibrate the method

Index = 100 × weighted score / active scored weights. Scaling all active entered weights by the same factor does not change the index.

Financial Attractiveness

Development cost

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
5 — Very low
4 — Low
3 — Moderate
2 — High
1 — Very high
0 — Exceptional
Deployment and change cost

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
5 — Very low
4 — Low
3 — Moderate
2 — High
1 — Very high
0 — Exceptional
Operating cost and TCO

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
5 — Very low
4 — Low
3 — Moderate
2 — High
1 — Very high
0 — Exceptional
Efficiency savings

Effective weight: 6.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — No credible return
1 — Very low
2 — Low
3 — Moderate
4 — High
5 — Transformational
Productivity or capacity gain

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — No credible return
1 — Very low
2 — Low
3 — Moderate
4 — High
5 — Transformational
Increased revenue

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — No credible return
1 — Very low
2 — Low
3 — Moderate
4 — High
5 — Transformational
New revenue

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — No credible return
1 — Very low
2 — Low
3 — Moderate
4 — High
5 — Transformational
Time to value

Effective weight: 1.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
5 — Value inside 3 months
4 — 3–6 months
3 — 6–12 months
2 — 12–24 months
1 — Over 24 months
0 — No credible path to value

Technology Efficiency

Time to engineer and deploy

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
5 — Under 1 month
4 — 1–3 months
3 — 3–6 months
2 — 6–12 months
1 — 12–24 months
0 — Over 24 months or blocked
Integration ease

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Blocked or incompatible
1 — Major bespoke effort
2 — Difficult
3 — Manageable
4 — Straightforward
5 — Native or near-frictionless
Internal skilled resources

Effective weight: 5.0%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Documentation and knowledge

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Organisational experience and maturity

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Partner ecosystem strength

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Industry supply-chain maturity

Effective weight: 3.3%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Vendor market maturity and competition

Effective weight: 1.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised
Licensing and regulatory readiness

Effective weight: 1.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Prohibited or unresolved
1 — Material blockers
2 — Significant work required
3 — Known path
4 — Mostly ready
5 — Clear and established
Training and talent availability

Effective weight: 1.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Absent
1 — Experimental
2 — Early
3 — Established
4 — Strong
5 — Industrialised

Strategic Alignment

Alignment with market priorities

Effective weight: 16.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Conflicts
1 — Weak or incidental
2 — Partial
3 — Material
4 — Strong
5 — Direct and critical
Alignment with strategic direction

Effective weight: 16.7%

Included in active scored-weight denominator
0–5 score anchors
0 — Conflicts
1 — Weak or incidental
2 — Partial
3 — Material
4 — Strong
5 — Direct and critical

3. Capture and assess initiatives

Introduce an enterprise HRIS

Established / complicated delivery profile. Delivery profile does not determine priority.

Score assessment: Efficiency savings

4 — included as a scored value.

Risk Exposure — optional, independent, higher is worse

Risk Exposure: No material risk (0). Maximum residual: 0. Higher is worse and is not included in Financial Attractiveness, Technology Efficiency or Strategic Alignment.

4. Review the portfolio

Technology Efficiency increases to the right; Strategic Alignment increases upward; Financial Attractiveness is bubble area; Risk Exposure is independent and higher is worse.

Technology Efficiency →Strategic Alignment ↑
Risk is independent; higher is worse.Not assessedNo material risk (0)Low — stripe / thin borderModerate — stripe / medium borderHigh — reverse stripe / heavy borderExtreme — dot pattern / double border
Exact portfolio comparison
InitiativeFinancial AttractivenessTechnology EfficiencyStrategic AlignmentRisk ExposureConfidenceEvidence gapsInvestmentDeliveryTime to valueRoadmap
Introduce an enterprise HRIS61.366.080.0No material risk (0)mediumNoneHigh relative investment9–15 months12–18 monthsNow
Develop an AR field-safety system50.840.090.0Not assessedlowEvidence gap openModerate exploratory investment6–12 month prototype9–18 monthsNext

5. Decide and record the roadmap

Live draft values — roadmap placement remains a human decision.

Introduce an enterprise HRIS

Develop an AR field-safety system