| name | idea-evaluation |
| description | Systematically evaluate and rank innovation ideas using multi-criteria scoring. Rate ideas on customer value, feasibility, viability, desirability, and strategic fit. Apply weighted scoring to identify top 3-5 ideas for deeper validation. Use after SCAMPER ideation generates 20-50+ ideas. |
Idea Evaluation - Multi-Criteria Scoring
Purpose
After generating 20-50+ ideas through SCAMPER ideation, you need a systematic way to evaluate and prioritize them. This skill helps you:
- Rate ideas objectively across multiple dimensions
- Apply weighted scoring based on your strategic priorities
- Identify the most promising 3-5 ideas for deeper validation
- Make data-informed decisions about which ideas to pursue
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when:
- You've completed SCAMPER ideation and have 20+ ideas to evaluate
- You need to narrow down to top ideas before investing in validation
- You want structured, defensible criteria for idea selection
- Multiple stakeholders need to agree on which ideas to pursue
- You're balancing competing priorities (innovation vs. feasibility, quick wins vs. long-term bets)
Input Required
Before starting evaluation, you need:
- List of ideas from SCAMPER ideation (20-50+ ideas)
- Closed World map from solution-definition phase
- PRFAQ to understand customer needs and strategic goals
- Strategic priorities - what matters most right now (speed? impact? learning? revenue?)
Evaluation Framework
Five Evaluation Dimensions
1. Customer Value (Impact on JTBD)
How much does this idea help customers get their job done?
- Pain relief: How much does it reduce customer frustrations?
- Gain creation: How much does it enable desired outcomes?
- Job performance: How much better/faster/cheaper does it make the core job?
2. Feasibility (Can We Build It?)
How realistic is it to implement this idea?
- Technical feasibility: Do we have the technology/skills?
- Operational feasibility: Can our processes support it?
- Resource availability: Do we have time/budget/people?
- Dependencies: How many unknowns or external dependencies?
3. Viability (Does It Make Business Sense?)
Will this idea work as a business?
- Revenue potential: Can we monetize it?
- Cost structure: Is it economically sustainable?
- Pricing: Will customers pay enough to make it viable?
- Unit economics: Does the math work at scale?
4. Desirability (Do Customers Want It?)
How emotionally appealing is this idea to customers?
- Emotional resonance: Does it spark delight/excitement?
- Brand fit: Does it align with how customers see us?
- Differentiation: Is it meaningfully different from alternatives?
- Shareability: Will customers tell others about it?
5. Strategic Fit (Does It Advance Our Vision?)
How well does this align with strategic goals?
- Competitive advantage: Does it create defensible differentiation?
- Vision alignment: Does it move us toward our long-term vision?
- Learning value: Does it teach us something important?
- Platform potential: Can it unlock future opportunities?
Scoring Scale (1-5)
5 - Exceptional: Best-in-class, transformative impact, clear path forward
4 - Strong: Significant positive impact, manageable challenges
3 - Moderate: Decent impact, notable trade-offs or uncertainties
2 - Weak: Marginal impact, significant concerns or barriers
1 - Poor: Minimal impact, critical flaws or deal-breakers
Workflow
Step 1: Quick Filter (5-10 minutes)
Before detailed scoring, do a quick pass:
- Remove duplicates or near-duplicates
- Eliminate ideas that clearly violate constraints (regulatory, ethical, technical impossibilities)
- Group similar ideas as variations
- Result: Reduce from 40-50 to 20-30 distinct ideas worth evaluating
Step 2: Define Evaluation Criteria & Weights (10-15 minutes)
Decide what matters most for your context:
Standard weighting (balanced innovation):
- Customer Value: 25%
- Feasibility: 20%
- Viability: 20%
- Desirability: 20%
- Strategic Fit: 15%
Example alternative weightings:
Fast follower / quick wins:
- Feasibility: 30%
- Viability: 25%
- Customer Value: 25%
- Strategic Fit: 15%
- Desirability: 5%
Disruptive innovation / moonshot:
- Customer Value: 30%
- Strategic Fit: 30%
- Desirability: 20%
- Feasibility: 10%
- Viability: 10%
Early stage / learning mode:
- Customer Value: 30%
- Desirability: 25%
- Strategic Fit: 25%
- Feasibility: 15%
- Viability: 5%
Choose weights that reflect your current priorities and constraints.
Step 3: Score Each Idea (30-60 minutes)
For each idea, score 1-5 on each dimension:
Scoring tips:
- Be honest - don't inflate scores to favor pet ideas
- Use evidence from Closed World and PRFAQ to ground scores
- Note key assumptions or uncertainties for each score
- Compare ideas to each other (relative scoring)
- If uncertain, err toward middle scores (2-3) rather than extremes
Recommended approach:
- Score all ideas on ONE dimension at a time (e.g., score all on Customer Value first)
- This ensures consistency and allows relative comparison
- Review and adjust outliers
- Add brief reasoning notes for scores below 2 or above 4
Step 4: Calculate Weighted Scores (5 minutes)
For each idea:
- Multiply each dimension score by its weight
- Sum to get total weighted score (max 5.0)
- Rank ideas from highest to lowest total score
Example calculation:
Idea: "Daily micro-payment repayments"
- Customer Value: 4 × 0.25 = 1.00
- Feasibility: 3 × 0.20 = 0.60
- Viability: 3 × 0.20 = 0.60
- Desirability: 4 × 0.20 = 0.80
- Strategic Fit: 5 × 0.15 = 0.75
- Total: 3.75
Step 5: Analyze Results & Select Top Ideas (15-20 minutes)
Review the ranking:
- Identify top 10 ideas by weighted score
- Look for patterns (which dimensions drive high scores?)
- Check for surprises (ideas that scored higher/lower than expected)
Apply filters and reality checks:
- Minimum threshold: Consider only ideas scoring >3.0
- Must-haves: Filter for critical requirements
- Diversity: Ensure top ideas span different SCAMPER techniques
- Quick wins vs. long bets: Balance portfolio of ideas
Select top 3-5 ideas for validation:
- These will go to critical-validation phase (Six Thinking Hats)
- Aim for diversity: different types of innovations
- Include at least one "stretch" idea that challenges assumptions
- Document why these were selected
Step 6: Create Evaluation Summary (10 minutes)
Document your evaluation:
- Criteria and weights used
- Full ranking of all ideas with scores
- Top 3-5 selected ideas with rationale
- Key insights from the evaluation process
- Next steps for validation
Output Format
See assets/evaluation-template.md for ready-to-use template.
Evaluation Summary Structure
# Idea Evaluation Summary: [Product/Service Name]
## Evaluation Criteria & Weights
**Strategic Context:** [1-2 sentences: why these weights?]
- Customer Value: X%
- Feasibility: X%
- Viability: X%
- Desirability: X%
- Strategic Fit: X%
## Ideas Evaluated
**Total ideas generated:** X
**Ideas after quick filter:** X
**Ideas scored:** X
## Top 10 Ranked Ideas
| Rank | Idea | Customer Value | Feasibility | Viability | Desirability | Strategic Fit | **Total** |
|------|------|----------------|-------------|-----------|--------------|---------------|-----------|
| 1 | [Idea name] | 4.0 | 3.5 | 4.0 | 4.5 | 4.0 | **4.05** |
| 2 | [Idea name] | 3.5 | 4.0 | 3.5 | 3.5 | 4.5 | **3.75** |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
## Selected Top 3-5 Ideas for Validation
### Idea 1: [Name]
**Weighted Score:** X.XX
**Why selected:** [1-2 sentences]
**Key strengths:** [bullets]
**Key concerns to validate:** [bullets]
### Idea 2: [Name]
[Same structure]
## Insights from Evaluation
**Patterns observed:**
- [What types of ideas scored highest?]
- [Which dimensions were hardest to score?]
- [Any surprises in the ranking?]
**Portfolio balance:**
- Quick wins: X ideas
- Strategic bets: X ideas
- Learning experiments: X ideas
## Next Steps
1. Deep validation of top 3-5 ideas using critical-validation skill (Six Thinking Hats)
2. [Other next steps specific to your context]
Examples
See references/example-outputs.md for complete evaluation examples:
- FairCredit: Evaluating 20 micro-lending innovation ideas
- AsyncFlow: Evaluating 15 collaboration platform ideas
- SolarSeva: Evaluating 18 solar system innovations
- Unbroken: Evaluating 16 logistics resilience ideas
Tips for Success
Do:
- Be ruthless in quick filter - eliminate weak ideas early to focus evaluation time
- Score relative to each other - "Is this idea better than that one on Customer Value?"
- Use evidence - refer to Closed World and PRFAQ when scoring Feasibility and Strategic Fit
- Adjust weights - if all ideas score similarly, reconsider your weights
- Document reasoning - especially for extreme scores (1-2 or 4-5)
- Seek diversity - top ideas should span different innovation types
Don't:
- Over-analyze - evaluation is not validation; save deep thinking for top 3-5
- Fall in love with ideas - score objectively even if you personally love an idea
- Ignore gut feelings - if scoring feels wrong, examine why (might reveal missing criteria)
- Expect consensus - different stakeholders may weight differently (that's okay!)
- Treat scores as absolute truth - they're decision aids, not guarantees
Common Pitfalls
1. Equal weighting trap
Using 20% for all five dimensions means you haven't made strategic choices. Force yourself to prioritize.
2. Feasibility bias
Defaulting to "easy to build" ideas misses breakthrough innovations. Balance feasibility with customer value.
3. Founder's favorite
Don't inflate scores for your pet idea. Use evidence and compare objectively.
4. Analysis paralysis
Don't spend 2 hours debating whether an idea is a 3.2 or 3.4. Move quickly, trust the process.
5. Missing must-haves
Some ideas may score well but violate hard constraints (regulatory, ethical, brand). Filter these early.
Integration Points
Input from ideation-scamper:
- List of 20-50+ SCAMPER-generated ideas
- Categorization by SCAMPER technique
- Quick filtering already reduced duplicates
Input from solution-definition:
- Closed World map informs Feasibility scores
- PRFAQ informs Customer Value and Strategic Fit
- Stakeholder FAQs reveal constraints affecting Viability
Output to critical-validation:
- Top 3-5 ideas with scores and rationale
- Key concerns to validate per idea
- Strategic context for validation priorities
Customizing the Framework
Add dimension for your context:
- Risk tolerance - for conservative organizations
- Speed to market - when timing is critical
- Regulatory compliance - for heavily regulated industries
- Team morale - when engagement matters
- Partner dependencies - when ecosystem critical
Adjust scoring scale:
- Use 1-3 scale for faster evaluation (fewer nuances)
- Use 1-10 scale for fine-grained comparison (more time needed)
- Use Yes/No for must-have criteria before scoring
Change workflow:
- Collaborative scoring: Multiple people score independently, then discuss differences
- Two-round scoring: Quick scores first, then detailed review of top 15
- Assumption-based scoring: Mark which scores depend on unvalidated assumptions
When to Re-Evaluate
Evaluation is a snapshot in time. Re-evaluate if:
- Major new information emerges (market shift, competitor launch, technology breakthrough)
- Strategic priorities change (new CEO, pivot, funding)
- Initial validation reveals assumptions were wrong
- 3-6 months pass (market and capabilities evolve)
Next Steps
After completing idea evaluation:
- Document results: Use template in
assets/evaluation-template.md
- Communicate decisions: Share rationale with stakeholders
- Validate top ideas: Use
critical-validation skill (Six Thinking Hats) on top 3-5
- Archive lower-ranked ideas: Don't delete them; context may change
- Learn from process: What surprised you? What would you weight differently next time?
Remember: Evaluation narrows options, validation tests assumptions. Don't confuse the two.
