Swim Lane Diagram:
Dive Into Complex Decision-Making
Some weeks ago, I shared a decision making method that utilized a Two-By-Two Diagram to rank/filter ideas using two key parameters.
While I received positive feedback, I was asked what to use when you need to rank/filter ideas that involve more than just two parameters.
For this, I recommend using a “swim lane” diagram. (It involves parallel rows akin to lanes in a pool). This diagram allows you to rank an unlimited number of ideas by an unlimited number of qualities.
How It Works (The Basics)
Let’s say you and I have come up with three really great ideas that will help build awareness and excitement for our winter product line. They are summarized as…
- Idea A,
- Idea B, and
- Idea C.
We have also determined that there are four key parameters by which we want to judge these ideas. They are…
- Ease of Implementation (challenging to easy),
- Investment of Money (expensive to cheap),
- Brand Fit (erodes to strengthens), and
- Investment of Time/Training (high to low).
Let’s plop these into a swim lane diagram. We’ll make the lefthand side the “undesirable” qualities, and the right the “desired.” The “better” ideas will score more to the right.

Next we’ll plot our three ideas where they fall in each lane.

Finally, I’ll connect the lines.

Now we can see how these how these ideas rank according to our key parameters.
- Idea A is difficult to implement and requires a lot of training, but doesn’t require a lot of cash.
- Idea B is the easiest to implement, but is fairly expensive.
- Idea C is expensive, but helps build the brand and doesn’t require much training.
At a glance, I would say Idea C may be our best bet.
I know… I know what you’re thinking… this isn’t very scientific. AND if we had any more ideas or parameters to plot, it would be unclear how the ideas rank.
If the basic method isn’t robust enough for what you’re working on, I recommend these additional steps.
How It Works (Advanced Method)
Let’s allocate an Importance Score – a value between 0% and 100% – for each parameter. 0 will indicate lowest importance. 100 will indicate highest importance.
We’ll then multiply the parameter score by the importance %. (The parameter score for “ease of implementation is 1, multiplied by the importance score of 100%… and so on).

Finally, we’ll do this for each idea and see which has the highest weighed score. THIS is the idea that is our best bet.

Using this advanced method, I was able to confirm my initial assessment that Idea C would be our best bet.
With more parameters and more ideas to plot, this advanced method will provide reliable results.
Finally, I’ve added a hand-drawn version of the swim lane diagram below. I don’t want the fact I used a drawing program to make this look like a complicated exercise. You can use a white board, flip chart, or the back of a napkin and do this process in just a few minutes.

After you’ve given this a try, please share your success stories!
This article was originally published on the Marketing Profs Daily Fix blog.












Your post is a clear, understandable explanation — I’m glad you did this.
I’d like to mention the late Geary Rummler, a true strategic thinker, whom this Gartner Research interview credits as “the father of the swim lane.” The book he wrote with Alan Brache, Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart, is well worth searching for.
.-= Dave Ferguson´s last blog ..Learning campaigns, or, out in the country =-.
Dave, thank you for those details! I’m going to have to look into Mr. Rummler’s work!
this technique is a version of the parallel coordinates visualisation, which originated in the 1970s.
one well-known example (which was also given a new name by it authors) is the “strategy canvas” from blue ocean strategy.
google “parallel coordinates” and “strategy canvas” to see lots of examples.
the method is very simple to use (and to visualise, as you point out.)
however, it also has a very serious drawback: it assumes that all the dimensions are commensurable. this is an assumption we know from school, where a good grade in english can compensate a bad grade in maths, for example.
here we are assuming that three points for brand fit are equivalent to three points for ease of implementation. this is an assumption which is seldom true in practice.
Graham, thanks for visiting Idea Sandbox – and for your comments.
To your last point – that the parameters aren’t commensurable… Doesn’t the “advanced method” I point out at the end, where a “parameter score” is applied allow proper weighting?
certainly, the “advanced method” allows you to assign different weights (i.e. degrees of importance) to the different criteria.
however, by doing so, (more precisely: by forming the sums), you imply that the criteria are commensurable. for example that 2 points brand multiplied by 40% is equivalent to 4 points ease multiplied by 20%.
Graham. Thanks again… I’ll have to find someone who has found a better way, and share that! Perhaps Geary Rummler as was mentioned in Dave’s comments earlier.
Thanks for pushing me, Graham!
almost everyone uses something similar, and it’s in many of the (academic german) innovation management books. it’s ok as long as everyone is aware of the potential danger of balancing out things numerically that subjectively feel very different.
the most important thing is to give people a feeling for their options, and the visualisation of the swim race is a nice way to achieve that.
If you really want to see the power of parallel coordinate graphs take a look at our website http://www.c-visual.com
This is a very good article that places a process to help make decision making a little more tangible. The examples are clear and concise allowing for ease of use by (in my humble opinion) by most people.
Thank you so much for taking the time to share this process and allowing others to use it for their decision making.
Best Regards,
Gil Pizano
http://gilpizano.com
.-= Gil Pizano´s last blog ..Some Interesting Facts about Laughing that You May Not Have Known =-.