Use 1000minds to create processes for group decision-making with as many participants as you like.

Our tools for decision-making and prioritization, value for money and conjoint analysis are intended to be used by groups of people (as well as by individuals, of course).

In addition, we have the following distributed processes for 10s or 100s (even 1000s!) of people to participate in.

Survey participants can self-enrol from a sign-up webpage – e.g. great for ‘convenience’ or ‘snowball’ sampling. Or, if you know people’s email addresses, you can enter them into 1000minds, and they’ll be invited to take part.

Distributed processes

All six activities below are potentially useful for a complete decision-making process.

Realistically, though, you’re likely to use fewer activities – e.g. perhaps just a Preferences Survey on its own, or a Ranking Survey followed by a Preferences Survey, or other combinations.

As well as 1000minds surveys, you can embed another online survey (e.g. Wufoo, SurveyMonkey, Google Forms) into your survey to collect other information of interest such as participants’ socio-demographic data.

icon Preferences Survey

This survey – also known as a Conjoint Analysis Survey when 1000minds is used for conjoint analysis – entails participants answering questions involving trade-offs between pre-specified criteria.

Participants’ answers determine, via the PAPRIKA method, their individual preference values (or ‘part-worth utilities’) – representing the relative importance (weights) of the criteria – and on average for the group.

The preference values can be used to rank alternatives, and it’s easy to compare participants’ rankings, and their preference values and answers to the survey questions.

Step-by-step guide to a preferences survey

icon Online Voting

This is like the Preferences Survey above, except that participants as a group reveal their preference values – representing the relative importance (weights) of the criteria – by voting on their decisions online.

Alternatively, participants can use a decision-support centre or their laptops from a shared location.

This activity reveals the preference values for the group of participants as a whole, and can be used to rank alternatives.

icon Ranking Survey

This survey involves participants ranking descriptions of real or hypothetical alternatives intuitively. Significant disagreements about rankings may indicate the need for a new prioritization approach (e.g. using 1000minds!).

Participants can also work together to rank the alternatives by consensus.

By having participants discuss their rankings, criteria for differentiating amongst alternatives can be teased out and then used to create a 1000minds decision model.

Participants can also work together to rank alternatives by consensus, for use later as a pseudo-gold standard to be compared against rankings from other group decision-making activities.

Step-by-step guide to a ranking survey

icon Categorization Survey

Participants categorise – or vote on – descriptions of real or hypothetical alternatives according to pre-specified criteria. People can also work together to categorise (vote on) the alternatives by consensus.

In some applications, for example, any disagreements about alternatives’ categorizations may highlight issues with how criteria are worded, so they can be refined.

Alternatives can also be ranked based on how they were categorised by applying the preference values (or ‘part-worth utilities’) – e.g. from a Preferences (or Conjoint) Survey (as above).

Step-by-step guide to a categorization survey

icon Ranking Comparisons

This activity enables participants’ rankings of alternatives from the various other activities (as above) to be easily compared. Ranking similarities and differences are useful for considering the rankings’ face validity.

For example, some users apply the consensus ranking from a Ranking Survey as a pseudo-‘gold standard’ to be compared against rankings from other group decision-making activities.

icon Alternatives Entry

For groups to enter alternatives – usually, when there are large numbers – into 1000minds, including rating them on pre-specified criteria.

The entered alternatives can then be aggregated (by 1000minds) for decision-makers to review and apply in a 1000minds decision model.

This activity enables an administrator or manager to distribute the task of entering alternatives across a group of people – perhaps with specialised roles or expertise – including rating the alternatives on pre-specified criteria.

Equivalently, this activity can be implemented as a survey whereby participants suggest or nominate alternatives for consideration.

(Of course, the usual approach for entering alternatives into 1000minds – when you don’t want to distribute the task across a group of people – is directly via the decision model itself. Data in Excel can be imported directly.)

Step-by-step guide to participants entering alternatives