Agreement and certainty matrix

The Agreement and Certainty Matrix is a tool designed to help individuals or groups match the right problem-solving approach to the nature of the challenge they face.

This structure helps avoid the common mistake of applying the wrong methods to problems by categorizing challenges based on two dimensions:

Level of Agreement (on what needs to be done)
Level of Certainty (about how to do it)

What makes it possible:

Clarity: It enables teams to quickly assess whether a challenge is simple, complicated, complex, or chaotic.
Better Decision-Making: By understanding the nature of the problem, teams can choose methods that are more likely to succeed.
Avoiding Mismatches: Prevents the use of overly simplistic or overly complex solutions where they don’t fit, which is often the root of recurring issues.

Time needed
45 minutes

Preparation

Offline Format	Online Format
One page with blank Matrix for every participant	Prepare virtual whiteboard template (for example Miro) to gather ideas
Split into groups (first pairs, then 4-6 people)	Split into groups (first pairs, then 4-6 people) - prepare the rooms online
Post-its

Set the stage
1. Introduce the Challenge: Present the specific challenge, problem, or opportunity the group will map. Write it clearly for everyone to see. Example: "How should we proceed with the launch of our new product?" or "How do we address the declining customer satisfaction?"
2. Invite participants to categorize their current challenges as simple, complicated, complex, or chaotic
3. Ask them to place them in the matrix based on their answers to two questions:
- What is the degree of agreement among the participants regarding the challenge and the best way to address it?
- What is the degree of certainty and predictability about what results will be generated from the solutions proposed for addressing the challenge?
Step-by-step and timing
1. Individual Reflection (10 min) - Ask participants to individually list the challenges that consume their time and place them on their own matrix.
  1. As a facilitator: Maintain silence. Encourage honest, individual assessment. Reassure them there's no "right" answer at this stage.
2. Pair Discussion (5 min) - In pairs, discuss the challenges and how they were placed on the matrix.
3. Small Group Comparison (10 min) - Form groups of 4–6 people to compare matrixes, identify commonalities, and note differences.
4. Group Synthesis (5 min) - Combine all challenges onto one large shared matrix.
5. Pattern Reflection (5 min) - In small groups, reflect on:
  “What patterns do we see? Are there any mismatches that stand out and should be addressed?”
6. Plenary Sharing & Next Steps (10 min) - Invite the whole group to share insights and agree on next steps.
  - As a facilitator:
    
    Encourage active listening and respectful debate.
    
    Look for common themes and significant differences in perception.
    
    Guide the group towards a shared understanding of where the challenge mostly lies on the matrix. It's okay if there's still some debate, but aim for a collective sense.
    
    If the notes are very spread out, this indicates a lack of shared understanding, which is a valuable insight in itself. You might need to refine the challenge statement or have a deeper discussion about its different aspects.
Hints
1. Clarify Scope - Begin by clearly defining the types of challenges and activities participants should include—e.g., time-consuming tasks, recurring blockers, or decision-making bottlenecks.
2. Encourage Non-Judgmental Sharing - Emphasize that there are no “right” or “wrong” placements on the matrix. The goal is to understand individual perspectives, not to critique them.
3. Prompt Reflective Dialogue - Use guiding questions like:
  “Where are there mismatches in your approach?”
  “What countermeasures might make sense?”
4. Capture Insights Visibly
  Create a shared table or board that documents:
  - Identified mismatches (e.g., tasks placed differently across participants)
  - Proposed countermeasures or action steps
  - Owners or follow-up plans, if applicable
Examples of use
1. Project Kick-off and Scoping
- Scenario: A diverse team is starting a new project. There are many unknowns, conflicting ideas, and different levels of understanding about the project's goals and challenges.
- Outcome: The team gains a shared understanding of the project's landscape. They can then prioritize and decide on the best approach for each area:
  - Simple: Just do it.
  - Complicated: Assign an expert to analyze the options and make a recommendation.
  - Complex/Chaotic: Run a series of small, safe-to-fail experiments (e.g., prototype a small feature and get user feedback) instead of making a large, risky bet
2.Strategic Planning for an Organization
- Scenario: A leadership team is trying to decide on the organization's priorities for the next quarter or year. There are many potential initiatives, but resources are limited.
- Outcome: The leadership team gets a clear picture of where they have shared understanding and where they need more conversation or data. They can allocate resources more effectively:
  - Simple: Delegate these tasks.
  - Complicated: Assign a task force to research and present options.
  - Complex: Dedicate resources to a small number of "prototyping" teams or experiments to explore potential solutions.
3. Conflict Resolution and Group Decision-Making
- Scenario: A team is stuck on a contentious issue. People are arguing about the "right" answer, but they may be disagreeing for different reasons.
- Outcome: The matrix clarifies the source of the disagreement. It's often not about the solution itself, but about a fundamental difference in how people perceive the problem's nature. This allows the group to shift from arguing about a solution to agreeing on the best way to move forward given the problem's complexity (e.g., "Okay, we disagree on the answer, but we all agree this is a Complicated problem. So let's gather more data from an expert and reconvene").
Link with other Liberating Structures
String together with strategy oriented Liberating structures:
Link to Liberating Structures page
Agreement and certainty matrix
Link to virtual whiteboard template (Miro)

Agreement and certainty matrix

Feedback