3e2a1b56-dafb-454d-87ad-86adea3e7b86

614
Part Four
Improvement
Figure 20.9 Priority zones in the importance–performance matrix
factor according to its scores or ratings on these criteria. Figure 20.9 shows an importance–
performance matrix divided into zones of improvement priority. The first zone boundary is
the ‘lower bound of acceptability’ shown as line AB in Figure 20.9. This is the boundary
between acceptable and unacceptable performance. When a competitive factor is rated as
relatively unimportant (8 or 9 on the importance scale), this boundary will in practice be low.
Most operations are prepared to tolerate performance levels which are ‘in the same ballpark’
as their competitors (even at the bottom end of the rating) for unimportant competitive
factors. They only become concerned when performance levels are clearly below those of
their competitors. Conversely, when judging competitive factors which are rated highly (1 or
2 on the importance scale) they will be markedly less sanguine at poor or mediocre levels of
performance. Minimum levels of acceptability for these competitive factors will usually be at
the lower end of the ‘better than competitors’ class. Below this minimum bound of acceptability
(AB) there is clearly a need for improvement; above this line there is no immediate
urgency for any improvement. However, not all competitive factors falling below the
minimum line will be seen as having the same degree of improvement priority. A boundary
approximately represented by line CD represents a distinction between an urgent priority
zone and a less urgent improvement zone. Similarly, above the line AB, not all competitive
factors are regarded as having the same priority. The line EF can be seen as the approximate
boundary between performance levels which are regarded as ‘good’ or ‘appropriate’ on one
hand and those regarded as ‘too good’ or ‘excess’ on the other. Segregating the matrix in this
way results in four zones which imply very different priorities:
●
●
●
The ‘appropriate’ zone – competitive factors in this area lie above the lower bound of
acceptability and so should be considered satisfactory.
The ‘improve’ zone – lying below the lower bound of acceptability, any factors in this zone
must be candidates for improvement.
The ‘urgent-action’ zone – these factors are important to customers but performance
is below that of competitors. They must be considered as candidates for immediate
improvement.