Matrix Insight

Organisations continually develop, introduce, and/or borrow from elsewhere innovations—be they programmes initiated by policy makers or interventions designed to improve people’s well-being—to improve policy and practice. But:

• not all innovations are good;
• it is not usually clear which innovations work and which do not, and why;
• the experience of other organisations and other evidence is typically under-used in the design of innovations; and
• decision-makers typically want to see early indications of whether innovations are likely to provide value for money before they can be fully assessed.

We have substantial experience across different sectors and countries of achieving the right level of methodological rigour of economic, qualitative and quantitative evaluations in the context of the real-life time and money constraints faced by decision-makers. We design and implement evaluation approaches to suit our clients’ needs and the particular context. These approaches range from quick reviews to long-term evaluations of complex social and health policy interventions.

Policy and decision-makers face the constant challenge of choosing between competing demands for investment in a way that maximises improvement in the well-being of the population. To make defensible and sound decisions they need to understand what works and what brings the greatest level of benefits compared to the costs. The Matrix Economics team applies the insights of economics to enable our clients to understand how resources can be allocated more efficiently to meet their objectives.

Our approach is defined by the latest developments in economic theory and techniques. We blend these with innovative thinking, knowledge of the public sector, and a focus on pragmatic, policy-oriented outcomes to embed the insights of economics in the decision making process. With networks across the public sector and universities, we are able to facilitate the transfer of learning across policy areas, and between academia and the public sector.

Our work has tackled some of the most interesting and pressing policy questions of the day, including:

• Should prison capacity be expanded?
• How should social workers be trained to detect child abuse?
• How should health and safety risks be regulated?
• Where are drug traffickers vulnerable to law enforcement activity?
• How should NHS budgets be spent to reduce future healthcare costs?
  
  

Decision-makers in organisations need data to simplify the complicated world in which they operate to help them make better decisions. Data can be used to:

• assess current performance against past performance and that of comparable organisations;
• diagnose sources of weak performance and challenges;
• predict future conditions;
• identify correlations and causes between different parts of the organisation’s operations and business; and
• compare the expected implications of different choices.

Whatever the purpose, the clear presentation of trusted data can be transformational. Sound analysis combined with a straightforward narrative can identify problems and generate the needed commitment to solve them. In contrast, the presentation of data that cannot be reconciled with experience and a narrative that is woolly are key ingredients for inertia.

We draw on the knowledge and experience of our quantitative experts and subject-matter experts to make sure that their data and the presentation of it helps rather than hinders them in making better decisions.

Organisations in the public and not-for-profit sectors do not have measures of performance that are as efficient and effective as the private sector’s measures of profit and share value. But such organisations are constantly being asked to do more with less. Hence many of our clients ask us to:

• help them find out if their organisation is doing a good job;
• assess if they making progress to achieving their mission;
• determine if they could be doing better; and
• develop a system that tells them how well they are performing.

But to improve performance an organisation needs to know more than simply whether it is performing well or not. It also needs to know:

• which parts of its operation are working well, and where can it improve;
• what policies and practices are fixed, and which can be changed;
• the options for change and the advantages and disadvantages of each;
• what is the business case for change;
• the barriers to change and how to overcome those barriers; and
• how to track changes in performance to make sure the diagnosis was correct and the improvements work.

To help our clients answer these questions we combine our:

• understanding of their business and performance monitoring issues;
• research expertise in making useful comparisons with other organisations and best practices;
• skills in analysing both quantitative and qualitative data; and
• suite of information technology tools that collect, collate, and report information on performance.
  
  

Every organisation, regardless of sector and its business, has to determine how to allocate staff and funding to be most effective in achieving its mission. But doing this well requires overcoming several challenges:

• for established organisations, inertia is a strong force. It is difficult to make changes to how resources are allocated from one year to another, even if the context and issues facing the organisation change.
• for new or redesigned organisations, determining the “right” allocation of resources requires understanding what impact the organisation can have, determining what resources are needed to make an impact, and making choices between different aims of the organisation. Doing this badly can lead to “locking in” resources in ways that do not reflect organisational priorities.
• shifting resources carries risks. It is often not clear in advance what the potential benefits are from redirecting resources from one programme or intervention to another, or indeed if the change will help the organisation become more or less effective.
• centralised funding bodies have different options on how to base allocations to regional or local organisations. It is not usually obvious which option to choose. Should resources be distributed to promote equality, to reward improvements, to maximise benefits, or a mix of these?

We provide our clients with:

• the technical support needed to develop and weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of different ways of allocating resources;
• a process for ensuring that the allocations are based on existing evidence and link to organisational priorities; and
• help in making sure all relevant stakeholders are informed about and can comment on how resources are used.
  
  

Defining and turning aspirations into reality is always a challenge for organisations that have limited resources to improve the well-being of individuals and society as a whole. The application of standard strategy development techniques in the public and not-for-profit sectors is complicated by the presence of multiple goals, stakeholder interests, and constraints. Our suite of approaches:

• builds on work already undertaken by clients;
• challenges and stretches clients by bringing our national, international and cross sector insight into engagements;
• promotes and supports leaders in taking ownership of new directions;
• uses engaging and experiential approaches; and
• focusses on the “how” and the risks, as well as the “what”.
  
  

Practices and business processes tend to be based on organisational history (how things have always been done), policy restrictions, and trial and error. It typically takes a long time for the latest research and evidence filter down into front-line practices. We help clients:

• keep up-to-date with good practices based on our sector insight, cross-sector knowledge, and research capabilities;
• design policies and processes according to good practices;
• build a business case for changes in practices to make sure everyone understands why change is needed; and
• implement the changes.