Editing MECE principle

{{Short description|Organizing method developed by McKinsey}}
{{Other uses|Mece (disambiguation){{!}}Mece}}
{{Strategy}}
The '''MECE principle''' ('''mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive''') is a grouping principle for separating a set of items into subsets that are [[mutually exclusive]] (ME) and [[collectively exhaustive]] (CE).<ref>{{cite web|last=Spencer|first=Tom|title=MECE Framework|date=30 January 2013|publisher=Consulting Frameworks|website=tomspencer.com |url=http://www.tomspencer.com.au/2013/01/30/mece-framework/}}</ref> It was developed in the late 1960s by [[Barbara Minto]] at [[McKinsey & Company]] and underlies her Minto Pyramid Principle,<ref name="Minto" /> and while she takes credit for MECE, according to her interview with McKinsey, she says the idea for MECE goes back as far as to [[Aristotle]].<ref name="Minto" />

The MECE principle has been used in the [[business mapping]] process wherein the optimum arrangement of information is exhaustive and does not double count at any level of the hierarchy. Examples of MECE arrangements include categorizing people by year of birth (assuming all years are known), apartments by their building number, letters by [[postmark]], and [[dice]] rolls. A non-MECE example would be categorization by nationality, because nationalities are neither mutually exclusive (some people have dual nationality) nor collectively exhaustive (some people have none).

== Common uses ==

Strategy consultants use MECE problem structuring to break down client problems into logical, clean buckets of analysis that they can then hand out as work streams to consulting staff on the project.

Similarly, MECE can be used in technical problem solving and communication.  In some technical projects, like [[Six Sigma]] projects, the most effective method of communication is not the same as the problem solving process. In Six Sigma, the [[DMAIC]] process is used, but executive audiences looking for a summary or overview may not be interested in the details.  By reorganizing the information using MECE and the related {{abbr|SCQA|Situation, Complication, Question, and Answer}} storytelling framework, the point of the topic can be addressed quickly and supported with appropriate detail. The aim is more effective communication.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://asq.org/quality-progress/articles/some-assembly-required?id=2fdaca65b02a4686b5a0e185f126e906|title=Some Assembly Required|last=Pruitt|first=W. Frazier|date=May 2020|website=asq.org|publisher=[[American Society for Quality|ASQ]]|access-date=25 September 2020}}</ref>

== Criticisms ==

The MECE concept has been criticized for not being exhaustive, as it does not exclude superfluous/extraneous items.<ref>{{cite web|last=van Gelder|first=Tim|title=What is MECE, and is it MECE?|date=June 4, 2010 |website=timvangelder.com|url=http://timvangelder.com/2010/06/04/what-is-mece-and-is-it-mece/}}</ref>

Also, MECE thinking can be too limiting as mutual exclusiveness is not necessarily desirable. For instance, while it may be desirable to classify the answers to a question in a MECE framework so as to consider all of them exactly once, forcing the answers themselves to be MECE can be unnecessarily limiting.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://faculty.msb.edu/homak/homahelpsite/webhelp/Content/MECE%20vs%20ICE.htm|title=MECE vs ICE|publisher=Homa Help Site|website=faculty.msb.edu|access-date=2014-11-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190307034410/http://faculty.msb.edu/homak/HomaHelpSite/webhelp/Content/MECE%20vs%20ICE.htm|archive-date=2019-03-07|url-status=dead}}</ref>

Another attribute of MECE thinking is that, by definition, it precludes redundancies. However, there are cases where redundancies are desirable or even necessary.<ref>{{cite book |last=Chevallier |first=Arnaud |date=2016 |title=Strategic Thinking in Complex Problem Solving |location=Oxford, UK; New York |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |page=78 |isbn=9780190463908 |oclc=940455195 |doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190463908.001.0001}}</ref>

== Acronym pronunciation ==

There is some debate regarding the pronunciation of the acronym MECE. Although it is pronounced by many as {{IPAc-en|ˈ|m|iː|s|i}},<ref>{{cite web |last=Cavano |first=Katharina |url=https://www.business2community.com/sales-management/3-steps-faster-moving-sales-pipeline-01500869 |title=3 Steps to a Faster Moving Sales Pipeline |website=www.business2community.com |date=3 April 2016}}</ref> the author insisted that it should be pronounced as {{IPAc-en|m|iː|s}}.<ref name="Minto">{{Cite web|url=https://www.mckinsey.com/alumni/news-and-insights/global-news/alumni-news/barbara-minto-mece-i-invented-it-so-i-get-to-say-how-to-pronounce-it|author=Minto, Barbara|website=McKinsey Alumni Center|title=MECE: I invented it, so I get to say how to pronounce it|language=en|access-date=2019-08-29}}</ref>

== See also ==
*[[Proof by cases]] or case analysis
*[[Partition of a set]] for a mathematical treatment
*[[Work breakdown structure]] for application in project management
*[[Algebraic data type]] in programming, which makes it possible to define analogous structures
*[[Carroll diagram]] in logic, which divides a set into partitions of attributes

== References ==
{{reflist|30em}}
==External links==
*{{Wikidata-inline}} <!-- if link to wikidata is undesirable, please delete -->
{{Strategic planning tools}}
[[Category:Types of groupings]]