Three Options and a Tie-Breaker Nobody Wanted
A housing association must replace a 15-year-old repairs scheduling system. Three options are on the table. Option A: like-for-like replacement, £600k, 9 months, low risk, no process change. Option B: cloud scheduling with tenant self-service, £1.4m, 15 months, medium risk, expected to cut call volume 25% and no-show appointments 15%. Option C: outsource the entire repairs contact function, £900k over five years, 6 months to transition, transfers 22 staff under TUPE, and the association loses direct control of tenant relationships. The board's stated priority is tenant satisfaction, which is currently 71% and falling. The finance director favours A on cost. The CEO favours B on ambition. No option appraisal criteria have been agreed.
1. Propose appraisal criteria and weight them, justifying each weight against the board's stated priority.
Read the worked answer
Criteria must be derived from the board's stated priority (tenant satisfaction) plus the constraints any responsible option must meet. Proposed:
| Criterion | Weight | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Impact on tenant satisfaction | 30% | The board's stated priority; must dominate |
| Financial cost / value for money | 20% | Necessary but not the stated priority |
| Delivery risk and timescale | 15% | Satisfaction is falling now; a 15-month fix may be too late |
| Operational control and flexibility | 15% | Option C's key weakness; affects ability to respond to tenants |
| Staff impact and capability | 10% | 22 staff, TUPE, service continuity |
| Strategic fit / future-proofing | 10% | Avoids repeating this decision in five years |
Justification points to make explicit:
- Cost is weighted below satisfaction because the board set the priority. If the FD disagrees, that is a sponsor-level conversation, not an analyst's choice.
- Timescale is weighted materially because satisfaction is falling - a slow fix may lose tenants before it helps.
- Control is included because Option C trades it away, and control is how the association influences satisfaction.
Weights should be agreed by the sponsor before scoring, to avoid the appearance of reverse-engineering.
2. Score the options against your criteria and identify the decisive factor.
Read the worked answer
Indicative scoring (1–5, weighted):
| Criterion (weight) | A | B | C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction (30%) | 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Cost (20%) | 4 | 2 | 3 |
| Risk/timescale (15%) | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| Control (15%) | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| Staff (10%) | 4 | 3 | 2 |
| Strategic fit (10%) | 1 | 5 | 2 |
| Weighted total | 3.15 | 3.65 | 2.60 |
B leads, but the margin over A is narrow and sensitive to the risk weight. The decisive factors are:
- B is the only option that addresses satisfaction directly through self-service and fewer missed appointments.
- A scores well on cost and risk but poorly on strategic fit - it buys nine months and returns the same problem.
- C is eliminated by the control criterion, which is not a scoring artefact but a real loss of the lever the board cares about.
The honest caveat: B's benefits (25% call reduction, 15% fewer no-shows) are vendor estimates. The recommendation should be B subject to validating those assumptions in the first three months, with A as the fallback if they do not hold. Present the sensitivity: if B's satisfaction score falls to 3, A wins. That tells the board exactly what the decision hinges on.