Affinity And Interrelationship Digraph: A Qualitative Approach To Identifying Organizational Issues In A Graduate Program - Statistical Data Included

College Student Journal, June, 2001 by Susan M. Winchip

This article illustrates how affinity diagram and interrelationship digraph (I.D.) tools can be used by administrators to collect and analyze data for planning purposes. Graduate students participating in affinity/interrelationship sessions were asked to identify issues that impacted the quality of the graduate experience at a Midwest university. Complex ideas and interrelationships were considered and organized into patterns for analysis. Students were able to identify and organize approximately 60 issues in two hours. The identified issues will be refined and serve as a resource for management and sequencing of action plans at the university.

During the past several years a mid-western university has been engaged in several initiatives to improve the quality of the graduate program. These initiatives included a study by the Graduate School to identify issues that affected the quality of the graduate experience at university "A". As coordinator of this study, this researcher collected and analyzed data by utilizing affinity diagram and interrelationship digraph (I.D.) tools. These tools were combined in a process that enabled administrators to more effectively and efficiently plan programs which addressed the needs of the graduate students. The purpose of this article is to illustrate how affinity diagram and I.D. tools can be utilized by administrators to collect and analyze data for planning purposes. These group data gathering tools are different from focus groups because the processes outlined by affinity diagram and I.D. tools assure that all ideas from the participants are shared, recorded, and included in the organization's plans. Furthermore, the process ensures that at the end of a meeting the organization will have prioritized solutions for a problem that were reached by consensus.

To facilitate the continuous improvement of quality and productivity many organizations utilize management and planning tools which were developed in post-World War II operations research work. These tools help to break down organizational barriers by providing structure to development cycles and giving individuals the ability to participate in planning processes (Brassard, 1989; Collett, 1992; Cornesky & McCool, 1992; Quick, 1992). Brassard (1989) identified the management and planning tools as: (a) affinity diagram/KJ Method, (b) interrelationship digraph (I.D.), (c) tree diagram, (d) prioritization matrices, (e) matrix diagram, (f) process decision program chart (PDPC), and (g) activity network diagram. In this study, the affinity diagram and I.D. tools were selected because administrators were only interested in identifying large amounts of data and determining the relationships between the issues. Information gained from the creative process of the affinity diagram became input for the logical I.D.

Affinity diagram or the KJ method is a technique developed in the 1960s by Jiro Kawakita, a Japanese anthropologist. Kawakita created the technique because he needed an efficient means to organize the numerous pages of information he recorded during field observations. The affinity diagram tool is an excellent means to brainstorm ideas and group concepts into categories. According to Brassard (1989) affinity diagram is a tool that "... gathers large amounts of language data (ideas, opinions, issues, etc.) and organizes it into groupings based on the natural relationship between each item. It is largely a creative rather than a logical process" (p. 4). The affinity process encourages innovation and open communication. The structured process inherent in affinity procedures prevents new ideas from being lost or half-developed.

The affinity diagram is often utilized in an organization when there is an issue or a problem that is grand in scale, complex or when new solutions need to be explored for a traditional problem. It is also effective to utilize the affinity process when it is important to reach consensus on an issue. An institution of higher education could utilize the affinity process when administrators wish to identify key demands of prospective students. Affinity could also be utilized to determine a plan for campus-wide resource allocations.

Interrelationship digraph also has roots in the Japanese philosophy that key ideas can emerge through a logical process. Interrelationship digraph is a tool that "... takes complex, multi-variable problems or desired outcomes and explores and displays all of the interrelated factors involved. It graphically shows the logical (and often causal) relationships between factors" (Brassard, 1989, p. 5). The I.D. tool is utilized to identify the root causes and effects of a problem or issue. This tool encourages "multidirectional" thinking by simultaneously analyzing several concepts.

The interrelationship digraph tool can be utilized to examine specific issues or general organizational concerns. The tool is utilized to study complex problems when it is difficult to identify the interrelationships between the concepts and it is unclear if the issue is the problem or the solution. The tool is an effective means to prioritize issues or steps in action plans. In institutions of higher education I.D. could be utilized to identify problems associated with admission procedures and policies. The tool could also be utilized to determine the most effective means to improve faculty productivity.