Why RICE is good for you

With expectations of cultural organisations so high, it’s always desirable that people in leadership make the best possible decisions – we all feel it. Increased internal and external scrutiny, transparency and process all come into play.

Recently I noticed I’m making more use of the RICE framework to help in prioritising effort and investment.

Reach, Impact, Confidence and Effort is a prioritisation model that provides a structured approach to evaluating and ranking projects or initiatives. Applying this framework, leaders can make more objective decisions about where to invest time, money or other resources and – crucially – what to de-prioritise.

At its heart, RICE is a simple scoring mechanism across four criteria. It can take days or weeks of intense discussion to weigh up the scores properly, or the whole exercise can be completed in a matter of moments to help you clarify your thoughts. I love that flexibility.

Reach: Expanding your audience

We start with reach. In the context of cultural organisations, reach refers to the number of people a project or initiative is likely to engage. This could include audience members, participants, digital consumers or even businesses in the case of a B2B proposition like even hire.

Reach needs to be considered in the context of strategy. A theatre weighing up whether to invest in a new main stage production or a series of community workshops may find the production would reach a larger audience overall, while the workshops could be more inclusive of target audiences and build lasting relationships in the community.

Assessing reach encourages leaders to think beyond immediate audience numbers and consider long-term engagement strategies. It prompts questions about accessibility, diversity and inclusion.

Impact: Creating a real strategic impact

Next, impact measures the effectiveness of a project in achieving its intended outcomes. This could encompass artistic excellence, social change, educational value or economic benefits to a local community.

Given the nature of our work at Baker Richards, we strongly encourage organisations to consider the profitability or retained income any new initiative would generate. When scoring impact, ask yourself how much money this will make.

If it wouldn’t break the RICE acronym, I’d also encourage you to always think of Impact as Strategic Impact. Does this activity advance your strategy? By explicitly considering Impact, leaders can align decisions with the organisation’s mission and strategic objectives.

Confidence: What are the chances of success?

Confidence represents the degree of certainty that a project will achieve its intended reach and impact. This factor acknowledges the inherent risks and uncertainties in any new initiative.

Including confidence in the decision-making process helps leaders balance innovation with stability. It stimulates thorough planning and risk assessment – if reach and impact score highly, but confidence is low, you’ll naturally focus on what’s stopping you from moving forward.

Effort: Evaluating resource requirements

Effort encompasses not just the money but the time and other human resources required to implement a project. In the resource-constrained environment of many arts organisations, this factor is crucial.

By explicitly considering effort, leaders can ensure they’re not overcommitting their organisation’s resources. It prompts important questions about capacity, sustainability and the potential need for additional funding or partnerships.

Putting RICE into practice

To use the RICE framework, first work out how many people an initiative will reach. Multiply this figure by impact, which is measured on a scale of 0 – 3. For example, 0.1 would be very low impact, 3 would be huge impact.

Next, how confident are you this can be done? 10% confident? Then use the figure 0.1. 80% confident? Use 0.8.

Finally, divide the figure by the effort involved. This might be the number of person weeks you’d need to dedicate to the project, or a simple scoring from 1-10.

These scores are then used in the formula (reach x impact x confidence)/effort to produce a RICE score, which can be used to rank different options. The higher the score, the higher the priority that project should have.

For example, a new community activity programme:

• Reach: 2,500 (engages a specific local community)
• Impact: 0.5 (meaningful engagement in a small population)
• Confidence: 0.8 (based on previous successful programmes)
• Effort: 6 (out of 10 – requires significant staff time but minimal financial investment)

RICE score: (2,500 x 0.5 x 0.8)/6 = 167

Versus a new exhibition with international loans:

• Reach: 30,000 (potential to attract large, diverse audience)
• Impact: 2 (significant artistic and educational value)
• Confidence: 0.6 (some uncertainty due to complex logistics)
• Effort: 9 (high financial and staff resource requirements)

RICE score: (30,000 x 2 x 0.6)/9 = 4,000

You quickly see that this approach is heavily influenced by reach and impact – if you find your calculations are too heavily influenced by reach, replace the true numbers with a 0-10 score. The important thing is to be consistent in how you calculate.

Why bother?

RICE is not magic. It’s not complex, or pseudo-scientific. It’s a simple way of adding structure to opposing options and thoughts. There’ll always be voices that say: “Why not both?” There’ll always be people who argue there’s no choice to make. Just do it all. But to lead is to choose.

Using RICE to weigh up competing options can help you achieve a holistic and more objective view, while testing alignment with your mission. The framework prompts leaders to consider how each initiative aligns with their organisation’s core purpose and strategic goals.

RICE forces us to be reductive when thinking about our resources – very simply, what’s the score? Nought to ten? Removing subjectivity can force us to confront when we don’t have the people power, or whether organisational norms and status quo bias are tempting us to stick with what we currently know, rather than freeing up resources to innovate.

Transparency

RICE scores can be used to explain and justify decisions to board members, funders and other stakeholders – internally, and externally. They serve as a useful conversation starter and structure to explain your thought process.

Though it can’t be the only factor in decision-making – there will always be a place for intuition, risk-taking or sheer opportunism to break any scoring system – but, in the complex and often unpredictable world of cultural organisations, it never hurts to have a little RICE in your diet.