Purpose

 

The Friction Priority Finder helps an organisation identify its biggest current source of cultural productivity friction and determine which CProF™ foundations should be prioritised for improvement.

​

It creates a clear starting point and provides baseline scores against which progress can later be measured.

​

​

Step 1. Identify the Biggest Source of Friction

​

Ask:​  Where does work most often slow down, become confused or require unnecessary effort?

 

Examples include:

• decisions taking too long;

• unclear ownership;

• ineffective meetings;

• excessive escalation;

• changing priorities;

• poor communication;

• silo working;

• approval delays;

• repeated rework;

• weak accountability.

​

Complete the following statements:

​

The biggest current source of friction is:  [Describe the issue]

​

It affects productivity by:  [Describe the effect]

​

Step 2. Score the Friction

​​

The purpose is not to create a long list of weaknesses. It is to concentrate attention on the foundations where improvement will make the greatest difference.

​

Score the current position from 1 to 5.

​

1. Severe friction. The issue regularly prevents work from progressing.

2. Significant friction. The issue frequently causes delays, confusion or wasted effort.

3. Moderate friction. The issue causes recurring productivity problems.

4. Limited friction. The issue occurs occasionally but is generally managed.

5. Minimal friction. The issue rarely affects productivity or operational flow.

​

Step 3. Identify the Relevant Foundations

​

Review the 72 CProF™ foundations and select the foundations that appear most closely connected to the identified friction.

 

Do not assess every foundation.

​

Select only the foundations that could reasonably be contributing to the problem.

​

For example, slow decision-making may relate to:

​

• decision-making behaviour;

• empowerment;

• escalation culture;

• escalation logic;

• operational clarity;

• meeting behaviour.

​

Step 4. Score the Selected Foundations

 

​Score each selected foundation from 1 to 5 using its foundation assessment statement.

​

1. Strongly disagree. This is a serious organisational weakness.

2. Disagree. This frequently reduces productivity.

3. Partly agree. Performance is inconsistent.

4. Agree. Performance is generally strong.

5. Strongly agree. This is consistently embedded and effective.

​

Step 5. Rate the Connection to the Friction

​

A low foundation score does not automatically make it the highest priority.

​

For each foundation, consider: How strongly is this foundation contributing to the identified friction?

​

1. Weak connection. The foundation has little direct influence on the friction.

2. Limited connection. The foundation contributes occasionally or indirectly.

3. Moderate connection. The foundation is one of several meaningful contributors.

4. Strong connection. The foundation is a major contributor to the friction.

5. Direct connection. The friction is unlikely to improve unless this foundation is addressed.

​

Step 6. Select the Priority Foundations

​

Select the three to five foundations most likely to reduce the identified friction.

​

Use the current score, connection score and available evidence to support the decision.

​

Do not automatically select the lowest-scoring foundations.

​

The priority should be the foundation most likely to improve the identified problem.

​

Output

​

At the end of the tool, the organisation will have:

​

• one clearly identified source of friction;

• a baseline friction score;

• the CProF™ foundations connected to the friction;

• a baseline score for each relevant foundation;

• a rating showing how strongly each foundation contributes;

• three to five priority foundations;

• desired scores against which progress can be measured.