The Stacey Matrix was originally developed by Ralph Douglas Stacey, a British organizational theorist and professor of management. Today, it is often used in a modified form to explain in which situations agile management makes sense.
The tool establishes a relationship between the characteristics of the system and the two criteria “clarity of requirements” and “clarity/familiarity of the solution approach”. It is often used in conjunction with the Cynefin framework.
The system properties are designated as:
– simple – complicated
– complex
– chaotic
Starting in the lower left (Simple) with known requirements and known solution to the upper right (Chaos) with unknown requirements and unknown solution paths.
- Simple (lower left field): Stakeholders have the same understanding of the requirements and it is clear to them how to proceed. Here, classic project management is a good way to solve the problem, such as with the waterfall model.
- Complicated: If stakeholders cannot describe exactly what they want to achieve and there are divergent ideas about the right way to proceed, a Kanban board may help organize the work.
- Complex: In these situations, it is not possible to draw on past experience. There is strong disagreement among stakeholders due to a high level of uncertainty. This is where agile methods like Scrum play a role.
- Chaotic: In (mostly acute) chaotic situations, one tries to proceed in small iterative steps. Smaller intermediate steps are important here for finding the next step. Methods such as Scrum, Lean Startup or Design Thinking are applied here.
Used in digital transformation, the Stacey Matrix in the form just used creates clarity that digitization is not just complicated and can be handled as a classic project. Often, there is no clear consensus among stakeholders about what digitization means for the organization, and there is a high degree of uncertainty about the future. Here we find a complex situation.
Frequent criticism of the Stacey Matrix in (including the form described here) is that it is inconsistent with Professor Stacey’s original model and key messages. In its further development, however, it is also a model that is well suited for reflecting on the initial situation and only makes the complexity of digitization visible.
