Lean 6 Sigma Hub
Project Selection Scoring Calculator
Rank competing improvement projects with a weighted criteria matrix. Set the criteria that matter, weight them, score each project and see exactly which work to fund first.
What this calculator does
Project selection decides whether your improvement programme delivers value or burns resources. This tool applies a weighted scoring matrix, the standard Define phase method for choosing between competing projects. You set the criteria that matter to your organisation, give each criterion a weight, then score every candidate project from 0 to 10.
The calculator multiplies each score by its weight, divides by the total weight, and returns a normalised score out of 10 for every project. It then ranks the projects, shows where each one gains or loses ground, and flags close calls that need a second look.
Why weighting matters. A simple average treats a 30 percent criterion the same as a 5 percent criterion. Weighting forces the team to state what the organisation actually values before anyone scores a project. That single step removes most of the argument from the selection meeting.
📝 How to use it
Step 1: Set your criteria
Start with the five default criteria or replace them with your own. Four to seven criteria works best. Fewer than four hides real trade offs. More than seven dilutes every weight until the ranking flattens out.
Step 2: Assign weights
Distribute weights so they total 100. The calculator normalises any total, so the maths still works if you land on 95 or 105, though a clean 100 makes the result easier to explain to a steering group.
Step 3: Add your candidate projects
List every project competing for the same funding and people. Compare projects that draw on the same resource pool. Comparing a two week kaizen against a twelve month capital build produces a ranking nobody will act on.
Step 4: Score each project from 0 to 10
Score every project against every criterion. Higher is always better, so invert cost, risk, and effort criteria. A cheap project scores high on cost. A risky project scores low on risk.
Step 5: Calculate and review
Press Calculate Rankings. The Results tab shows the ranked list, the score bands, a full comparison table, and recommendations tied to your numbers.
Step 6: Export the evidence
Download the Excel workbook and attach it to your project charter. The workbook records the criteria, the weights, every score, and the weighted contribution of each criterion so the decision stands up to challenge later.
📊 Scoring scale, 0 to 10
General scale
- 9 to 10: Exceptional, best case
- 7 to 8: Strong, clearly favourable
- 5 to 6: Adequate, acceptable
- 3 to 4: Weak, below expectation
- 0 to 2: Poor, a genuine barrier
Anchor your scores
Write one sentence describing what a 10 and a 0 look like for each criterion before you score anything. Anchored scales cut scoring variation between assessors by a wide margin and make the results repeatable.
Sample anchors by criterion
Strategic alignment
10 equals a named goal in the annual plan. 5 equals a useful but indirect link. 0 equals no line of sight to strategy.
Financial impact
10 equals top quartile return in your portfolio. 5 equals a modest saving. 0 equals no measurable financial benefit.
Resource availability
10 equals the team is free and named. 5 equals about half the capacity is confirmed. 0 equals no one is available.
Implementation complexity
10 equals one to two weeks and a single process owner. 5 equals two to three months across two functions. 0 equals a year or more across many sites.
Risk level
10 equals minimal risk with a proven method. 5 equals moderate risk with known mitigations. 0 equals high uncertainty and no fallback.
Time to value
10 equals benefit inside the current quarter. 5 equals a six to twelve month payback. 0 equals two years or longer.
💡 Pro tips
Agree the weights before you see the projects. Setting weights after scoring invites people to tune the model until their preferred project wins.
Score independently, then reconcile. Have three assessors score alone. Discuss any criterion where scores differ by three points or more. The discussion usually exposes a missing assumption.
Test the ranking for stability. If the top two projects sit within 0.5 points, shift your heaviest weight by 5 points and recalculate. If the order flips, the model is not deciding for you. Bring in a tiebreaker such as strategic urgency.
Keep the losers on record. Projects ranked low today often become strong candidates once a constraint clears. Store the workbook and rerun the model each quarter.
⚠️ Common mistakes
- Scoring cost and risk the wrong way round, which rewards expensive and risky projects.
- Giving every criterion a similar weight, which produces a flat ranking with no decision in it.
- Letting the most senior person in the room score first and anchor everyone else.
- Selecting on the score alone when a project fails a hard constraint such as a regulatory deadline.
- Padding the list with projects that were never realistic, which shifts the visual comparison.
📁 Load sample data
Each dataset includes a strong candidate, a middle performer, and a weak project so you can see the full colour coding.
⚖️ Selection criteria and weights
Name each criterion and set its weight. Higher scores must always mean a better outcome, so invert cost, effort, and risk.
Total weight: 100
🎯 Candidate projects
Add every project competing for the same budget and people, then score it against each criterion from 0 to 10.
No results yet
Enter your criteria and projects on the Calculator tab, then press Calculate rankings.