The Purpose Of This Assignment Is To Review The Root Causes ✓ Solved

The purpose of this assignment is to review the root causes of the

The purpose of this assignment is to review the root causes of the problem and all of the previously tried, as well as new, solutions you researched to address the problem.

From that information, potential solutions should be ranked based upon how well they meet the needs of the business and address the identified problem.

After this process is completed, the best solution for solving the problem within your organization can be selected.

Complete the 'Problem Solutions Matrix' spreadsheet using the data and information you collected through research and completion of the Stakeholder Analysis in Topics 2 and 3.

In the Solution Design Matrix tab, you will address the solutions previously implemented and compare to the new proposed problem solution for addressing the problem within your organization.

Be sure to consider the 'Solutions Score' column number when documenting the solutions. Review how to score your solution in the directions on the spreadsheet. When scoring your solutions, you must also consider the timeline for implementation, costs and benefits to key stakeholders and the greater good, potential roadblocks to implementation, and how you will measure and validate whether a solution is successful in addressing the problem.

After all of these have been considered and the solutions have been scored, identify the top three most viable solutions and transfer them to the 'Problems Solutions Matrix' Part 2 tab. You will then provide specific resources and data to support the problem-solving strategy and identify the best solution strategy as indicated in the spreadsheet.

Paper For Above Instructions

In the next phase, you should systematically catalog all potential solutions—both proven approaches from previous efforts and novel ideas discovered through research. The objective is to evaluate these alternatives against multiple criteria that matter to the business: feasibility, cost, benefits, timing, risk, alignment with strategic goals, and impact on key stakeholders. Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) provides a rigorous framework for this evaluation. Techniques such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) help structure pairwise comparisons and produce a defensible ranking when quantitative data are limited (Saaty, 1980). At the same time, decision analysts often employ value-focused thinking to articulate preferences and acceptable tradeoffs (Keeney & Raiffa, 1993). The combination of AHP for relative weights and a structured scoring approach supports transparent, repeatable assessments that can inform both the solution design matrix and the broader problem-solving strategy (Keeney & Raiffa, 1993; Linkov et al., 2006).

The assignment emphasizes the practical use of the target spreadsheets—the Problem Solutions Matrix and the Solution Design Matrix—as vehicles for organizing evidence, scoring alternatives, and selecting the top three viable options. A sound process would begin with data collection from stakeholder analyses completed in Topics 2 and 3, followed by mapping root causes to potential remedies. Each candidate solution should be described in clear terms, including required resources, estimated timelines, expected benefits, and potential risks. In a realistic setting, you would also identify indicators and metrics to assess post-implementation performance, calibrate expectations, and establish a feedback loop for continuous improvement (PMI, 2021).

When scoring, you should treat implementation timelines, costs, and benefits as core dimensions while also considering qualitative factors such as organizational culture, change readiness, and potential resistance. The top three solutions are those that maximize net value while minimizing risk and disruption. Transferring these three to Part 2 of the Problems Solutions Matrix ensures alignment between assessment outputs and actionable strategy. In parallel, you should articulate the resources, data sources, and analysis methods needed to support the chosen strategy. This justification will help secure executive sponsorship, allocate budgets, and guide implementation governance (Kepner & Tregoe, 1981; Freeman, 1984; Bryson, 2004).

Finally, the assignment calls for a comprehensive narrative that ties root causes to proposed remedies, demonstrates how stakeholders influence outcomes, and presents a credible measurement plan. The combination of root-cause rigor, stakeholder-centered framing, and structured decision analysis yields a robust pathway from problem identification to a recommended, implementable solution set. By adhering to these principles and leveraging the project-management framework, you can produce a defensible, data-informed strategy that supports organizational learning and sustained value creation (Ohno, 1988; Saaty, 1980; PMI, 2021).

References

• Bryson, J. M. (2004). Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.
• Ishikawa, K. (1968). Guide to Quality Control. Tokyo, Japan: Quality Control Association.
• Kepner, C., & Tregoe, B. (1981). The Kepner-Tregoe Problem Solving and Decision Making Process. Princeton, NJ: Kepner-Tregoe.
• Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
• Ohno, T. (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity Press.
• PMI. (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) (7th ed.). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
• Saaty, T. L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
• Linkov, I., et al. (2006). Multicriteria decision analysis: A framework for sustainability decisions. Environment International, 32(7), 977-986.
• Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.