Diagrams & Visuals - Lesson 1.3: Synthesize Data Using Affinity Diagrams

Visual Reference Library

This page collects all 7 diagrams from Lesson 1.3 in one place for easy reference. Each diagram uses the Festa Design System colors strategically: Chicken Comb for high-priority themes and pitfalls, Apocalyptic Orange for refinement actions, Pepper Green for validated findings, Pot of Gold for decision points, and Leaf for positive outcomes.

1. Four-Phase Affinity Diagram Process

graph TB
    Start["🎯 START: STAKEHOLDER INSIGHTS<br/><br/>Raw data from Lesson 1.2:<br/>• Interview notes<br/>• Focus group transcripts<br/>• Observation records<br/>• Survey responses"]

    subgraph Phase1["📋 PHASE 1: CAPTURE<br/>Duration: 45-60 minutes"]
        P1A["Extract Individual Insights<br/><br/>• One insight per card<br/>• Use stakeholder's words<br/>• Include context markers<br/>• Don't interpret yet"]
        P1B["Add Source Attribution<br/><br/>• Which stakeholder?<br/>• What conversation?<br/>• What question?<br/>• Date/location"]
        P1C["Quality Check<br/><br/>✓ One distinct insight per card<br/>✓ Specific and actionable<br/>✓ Source clearly marked<br/>✓ Both supportive & challenging"]

        P1A --> P1B
        P1B --> P1C
    end

    subgraph Phase2["🔍 PHASE 2: CLUSTER<br/>Duration: 30-45 minutes"]
        P2A["Spread All Cards Visibly<br/><br/>Physical or digital board<br/>where all insights visible"]
        P2B["Group by Natural Affinity<br/><br/>• What feels related?<br/>• Trust your instincts<br/>• Start with obvious clusters<br/>• Find subtle connections"]
        P2C["Allow for Outliers<br/><br/>Some insights stand alone<br/>Don't force groupings"]
        P2D["Refine Cluster Boundaries<br/><br/>• Split if too diverse<br/>• Merge if too similar<br/>• Let insights move<br/>• Iterate as patterns emerge"]

        P2A --> P2B
        P2B --> P2C
        P2C --> P2D
    end

    subgraph Phase3["🏷️ PHASE 3: THEME<br/>Duration: 30-40 minutes"]
        P3A["Examine Each Cluster<br/><br/>What's the common thread<br/>across these insights?"]
        P3B["Create Theme Headers<br/><br/>• Descriptive & specific<br/>• Captures essence<br/>• Actionable<br/>• Uses community language"]
        P3C["Test Theme Accuracy<br/><br/>Does this theme represent<br/>ALL insights in the cluster?"]
        P3D["Document Themes<br/><br/>• 2-3 sentence description<br/>• Key supporting quotes<br/>• Stakeholder groups<br/>• Surprises noted"]

        P3A --> P3B
        P3B --> P3C
        P3C --> P3D
    end

    subgraph Phase4["🔄 PHASE 4: SYNTHESIZE<br/>Duration: 20-30 minutes"]
        P4A["Map Theme Relationships<br/><br/>How do themes connect,<br/>reinforce, or contradict?"]
        P4B["Identify Priority Themes<br/><br/>• Frequency across stakeholders<br/>• Intensity of emphasis<br/>• Impact on Problem Tree<br/>• Intervention opportunities"]
        P4C["Extract Implications<br/><br/>What do themes mean for:<br/>• Problem Tree refinement?<br/>• Activity design?<br/>• Theory of Change?"]
        P4D["Prepare Integration<br/><br/>Connect themes to<br/>Problem Tree elements"]

        P4A --> P4B
        P4B --> P4C
        P4C --> P4D
    end

    Output["📊 SYNTHESIZED INSIGHTS<br/><br/>5-12 clear themes with:<br/>• Evidence from multiple sources<br/>• Community priorities identified<br/>• Problem Tree refinements ready<br/>• Action implications clear"]

    Start --> Phase1
    Phase1 --> Phase2
    Phase2 --> Phase3
    Phase3 --> Phase4
    Phase4 --> Output

    style Start fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Phase1 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style P1A fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style P1B fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style P1C fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Phase2 fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style P2A fill:#FDBA74,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style P2B fill:#FDBA74,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style P2C fill:#FDBA74,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style P2D fill:#FDBA74,stroke:#F37324,color:#2A2A2A
    style Phase3 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style P3A fill:#FDE047,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style P3B fill:#FDE047,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style P3C fill:#FDE047,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style P3D fill:#FDE047,stroke:#F8CC1B,color:#2A2A2A
    style Phase4 fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style P4A fill:#A3D977,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style P4B fill:#A3D977,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style P4C fill:#A3D977,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style P4D fill:#A3D977,stroke:#72B043,color:#2A2A2A
    style Output fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

The Core Synthesis Methodology

This four-phase process transforms raw stakeholder insights into organized, actionable intelligence. Phase 1 (Capture - Green) ensures quality data extraction. Phase 2 (Cluster - Orange) reveals natural patterns through grouping. Phase 3 (Theme - Gold) articulates the essence of each pattern. Phase 4 (Synthesize - Leaf) connects themes to your Problem Tree for refinement. Time estimates help you plan workshop sessions effectively.

Where else you'll see this: Four-Phase Process

2. Problem Tree + Affinity Integration Workflow

graph TB
    L11["📊 LESSON 1.1<br/>Problem Tree Analysis<br/><br/>OUTPUT:<br/>• Core problem identified<br/>• Root causes mapped<br/>• Effects documented<br/>• Items tagged (E) or (A)"]

    L12["🤝 LESSON 1.2<br/>Stakeholder Engagement<br/><br/>OUTPUT:<br/>• 30-80 stakeholder insights<br/>• Multiple perspectives<br/>• Validations & challenges<br/>• New information"]

    Affinity["🧩 LESSON 1.3<br/>Affinity Diagram Synthesis<br/><br/>PROCESS:<br/>Capture → Cluster →<br/>Theme → Synthesize"]

    Themes["🏷️ AFFINITY THEMES<br/><br/>5-12 themes emerge:<br/>• Community priorities<br/>• Validated patterns<br/>• Contradictions explored<br/>• Surprises documented"]

    subgraph Integration["🔄 INTEGRATION ACTIONS"]
        I1["Convert (A) → (E)<br/><br/>Assumptions validated<br/>by community become<br/>evidence-based findings"]

        I2["Add New Elements<br/><br/>Community revealed<br/>causes or effects<br/>not in original tree"]

        I3["Revise Existing Elements<br/><br/>Refine language to<br/>reflect community voice<br/>and priorities"]

        I4["Challenge Assumptions<br/><br/>Stakeholders contradicted<br/>desk research —<br/>community truth prevails"]

        I5["Identify Gaps<br/><br/>What's still uncertain?<br/>What needs deeper<br/>exploration?"]
    end

    Updated["🌳 UPDATED PROBLEM TREE<br/><br/>Community-validated analysis:<br/>• More (E) evidence<br/>• Fewer (A) assumptions<br/>• Community language<br/>• Locally grounded<br/>• Credible to funders"]

    L14["➡️ LESSON 1.4<br/>Theory of Change<br/><br/>Refined Problem Tree<br/>becomes foundation for<br/>change logic design"]

    L11 --> Affinity
    L12 --> Affinity
    Affinity --> Themes
    Themes --> Integration
    I1 --> Updated
    I2 --> Updated
    I3 --> Updated
    I4 --> Updated
    I5 --> Updated
    Updated --> L14

    L11 -.->|Original tree| Integration
    L12 -.->|Raw insights| Affinity
    Themes -.->|Evidence base| Updated

    style L11 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style L12 fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style Affinity fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Themes fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Integration fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style I1 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style I2 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style I3 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style I4 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style I5 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Updated fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px
    style L14 fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

How Three Lessons Converge

This diagram shows how Lesson 1.3 serves as the bridge between preliminary Problem Tree analysis (1.1) and stakeholder engagement (1.2), transforming scattered insights into structured refinements. The five integration actions ensure your Problem Tree evolves from desk research assumptions to community-validated evidence. By the time you reach Lesson 1.4, you have a credible foundation for designing your Theory of Change.

Where else you'll see this: Integration with Problem Tree

3. Insight Capture Quality Decision Flow

graph TB
    Start["📝 STAKEHOLDER INSIGHT<br/><br/>Statement from interview,<br/>focus group, or observation"]

    Q1{"Is it a<br/>discrete insight?"}

    Split["🔀 SPLIT INTO MULTIPLE CARDS<br/><br/>If statement contains multiple<br/>distinct insights, separate them"]

    Q2{"Uses stakeholder's<br/>own language?"}

    Preserve["✏️ PRESERVE ORIGINAL WORDING<br/><br/>Use quotes when possible<br/>Don't paraphrase yet"]

    Q3{"Source clearly<br/>attributed?"}

    AddSource["🏷️ ADD SOURCE INFORMATION<br/><br/>• Which stakeholder/group?<br/>• What question/topic?<br/>• Date/location<br/>• Context notes"]

    Q4{"Specific enough<br/>to be actionable?"}

    AddContext["📋 ADD CONTEXTUAL DETAILS<br/><br/>Include enough specificity<br/>to understand meaning later"]

    Q5{"Both supportive<br/>& challenging<br/>insights included?"}

    Balance["⚖️ ENSURE BALANCE<br/><br/>Don't cherry-pick insights<br/>that confirm assumptions<br/><br/>Include contradictions"]

    Ready["✅ READY FOR CLUSTERING<br/><br/>Well-captured insight card"]

    Start --> Q1
    Q1 -->|No, multiple ideas| Split
    Q1 -->|Yes| Q2
    Split --> Q2
    Q2 -->|No| Preserve
    Q2 -->|Yes| Q3
    Preserve --> Q3
    Q3 -->|No| AddSource
    Q3 -->|Yes| Q4
    AddSource --> Q4
    Q4 -->|No| AddContext
    Q4 -->|Yes| Q5
    AddContext --> Q5
    Q5 -->|Check overall| Balance
    Q5 -->|Balanced| Ready
    Balance --> Ready

    style Start fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q1 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q2 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q3 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q4 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Q5 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Split fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style Preserve fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style AddSource fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style AddContext fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style Balance fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style Ready fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Quality Starts at Capture

Poor insight capture leads to weak synthesis. This decision flow ensures each card meets five quality criteria: discrete (one idea), authentic (stakeholder's words), attributed (clear source), specific (actionable detail), and balanced (includes challenges). The orange refinement actions guide you to fix common problems before moving to clustering. Taking time during capture saves hours of confusion later.

Where else you'll see this: Four-Phase Process

4. Theme Quality Assessment Flow

graph TB
    Theme["🏷️ PROPOSED THEME<br/><br/>Theme header for<br/>a cluster of insights"]

    Test1["✅ TEST 1: Represents ALL Insights?<br/><br/>Does theme accurately capture<br/>every insight in the cluster?"]

    Decision1{"Pass?"}

    Refine1["🔄 REFINE THEME<br/><br/>Make theme more inclusive<br/>or split cluster"]

    Test2["✅ TEST 2: Specific Enough?<br/><br/>Is theme actionable and clear,<br/>not vague or generic?"]

    Decision2{"Pass?"}

    Refine2["🔄 ADD SPECIFICITY<br/><br/>Make theme more concrete<br/>and action-oriented"]

    Test3["✅ TEST 3: Community Voice?<br/><br/>Does theme use stakeholder<br/>language and priorities?"]

    Decision3{"Pass?"}

    Refine3["🔄 INCORPORATE LANGUAGE<br/><br/>Use community terms<br/>and framing"]

    Test4["✅ TEST 4: Multiple Sources?<br/><br/>Is theme grounded in insights<br/>from diverse stakeholders?"]

    Decision4{"Pass?"}

    Refine4["🔄 CHECK REPRESENTATION<br/><br/>Ensure theme reflects<br/>multiple perspectives"]

    Test5["✅ TEST 5: Clear Implications?<br/><br/>Does theme suggest action<br/>or Problem Tree connection?"]

    Decision5{"Pass?"}

    Refine5["🔄 CLARIFY IMPLICATIONS<br/><br/>Make connection to<br/>problem analysis explicit"]

    Approved["🎯 QUALITY THEME<br/><br/>Ready for synthesis phase"]

    Theme --> Test1
    Test1 --> Decision1
    Decision1 -->|No| Refine1
    Decision1 -->|Yes| Test2
    Refine1 --> Test1

    Test2 --> Decision2
    Decision2 -->|No| Refine2
    Decision2 -->|Yes| Test3
    Refine2 --> Test2

    Test3 --> Decision3
    Decision3 -->|No| Refine3
    Decision3 -->|Yes| Test4
    Refine3 --> Test3

    Test4 --> Decision4
    Decision4 -->|No| Refine4
    Decision4 -->|Yes| Test5
    Refine4 --> Test4

    Test5 --> Decision5
    Decision5 -->|No| Refine5
    Decision5 -->|Yes| Approved
    Refine5 --> Test5

    style Theme fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Test1 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff
    style Test2 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff
    style Test3 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff
    style Test4 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff
    style Test5 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff
    style Decision1 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Decision2 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Decision3 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Decision4 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Decision5 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Refine1 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Refine2 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Refine3 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Refine4 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Refine5 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Approved fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Five Tests for Theme Quality

Not all themes are created equal. This iterative testing flow ensures each theme passes five rigorous checks: comprehensive (represents all insights), specific (actionable), authentic (community voice), diverse (multiple sources), and connected (clear implications). The red refinement loops show where themes typically need improvement. Strong themes make synthesis and Problem Tree integration straightforward; weak themes create confusion downstream.

Where else you'll see this: Quality Checklist

5. Nigeria Youth Synthesis Example

graph TB
    Insights["💬 47 STAKEHOLDER INSIGHTS<br/><br/>From 45 stakeholders across<br/>8 groups (youth, employers,<br/>trainers, leaders, etc.)"]

    subgraph Cluster1["📦 CLUSTER 1: 12 insights"]
        C1["Sample Insights:<br/><br/>'Vocational graduates can't<br/>solve real workplace problems'<br/><br/>'Training programs teach<br/>outdated techniques'<br/><br/>'Employers need soft skills<br/>but schools focus on technical'"]
    end

    Theme1["🏷️ THEME 1:<br/>Skills-Market Disconnect<br/><br/>Training Misaligned with<br/>Employer Needs<br/><br/>Priority: HIGH<br/>Sources: 8 stakeholder types"]

    subgraph Cluster2["📦 CLUSTER 2: 8 insights"]
        C2["Sample Insights:<br/><br/>'Transportation costs eat up<br/>30% of potential wages'<br/><br/>'Can't afford to travel to<br/>training or job interviews'<br/><br/>'No internet in rural areas<br/>for remote work'"]
    end

    Theme2["🏷️ THEME 2:<br/>Geographic Access Barriers<br/><br/>Transport & Infrastructure<br/>Limit Opportunities<br/><br/>Priority: HIGH<br/>Sources: 5 stakeholder types"]

    subgraph Cluster3["📦 CLUSTER 3: 10 insights"]
        C3["Sample Insights:<br/><br/>'Young women face family<br/>pressure not to travel'<br/><br/>'Gender norms affect which<br/>jobs are considered acceptable'<br/><br/>'Women lack access to<br/>business networks'"]
    end

    Theme3["🏷️ THEME 3:<br/>Gender & Cultural Barriers<br/><br/>Social Expectations<br/>Restrict Participation<br/><br/>Priority: MEDIUM<br/>Sources: 4 stakeholder types"]

    subgraph Cluster4["📦 CLUSTER 4: 9 insights"]
        C4["Sample Insights:<br/><br/>'Previous programs failed<br/>because no real jobs'<br/><br/>'Training without employer<br/>connections is useless'<br/><br/>'Need mentors who actually<br/>succeeded in business'"]
    end

    Theme4["🏷️ THEME 4:<br/>Program Design Failures<br/><br/>Past Interventions Lacked<br/>Market Connection<br/><br/>Priority: HIGH<br/>Sources: 6 stakeholder types"]

    Integration["🔄 PROBLEM TREE INTEGRATION<br/><br/>Actions Taken:<br/>• Theme 1 → Enhanced 'Skills<br/>  mismatch' cause (A→E)<br/>• Theme 2 → Added 'Transport<br/>  barriers' as new cause<br/>• Theme 3 → Added 'Gender norms'<br/>  as underlying cause<br/>• Theme 4 → Informed activity<br/>  design principles"]

    Updated["🌳 UPDATED PROBLEM TREE<br/><br/>Now includes:<br/>• 15 evidence-based causes (E)<br/>• 5 assumptions for follow-up (A)<br/>• Community language throughout<br/>• Gender considerations explicit<br/>• Past failure lessons integrated"]

    Insights --> Cluster1
    Insights --> Cluster2
    Insights --> Cluster3
    Insights --> Cluster4

    Cluster1 --> Theme1
    Cluster2 --> Theme2
    Cluster3 --> Theme3
    Cluster4 --> Theme4

    Theme1 --> Integration
    Theme2 --> Integration
    Theme3 --> Integration
    Theme4 --> Integration

    Integration --> Updated

    style Insights fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:2px
    style Cluster1 fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Cluster2 fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Cluster3 fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Cluster4 fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style C1 fill:#E5E5E5,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style C2 fill:#E5E5E5,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style C3 fill:#E5E5E5,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style C4 fill:#E5E5E5,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Theme1 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Theme2 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Theme3 fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style Theme4 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style Integration fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style Updated fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Real-World Application

This Nigeria youth livelihood example demonstrates the complete synthesis workflow with concrete numbers: 47 insights from 45 stakeholders produced 4 major themes. Notice how themes are prioritized (HIGH/MEDIUM) based on frequency and impact. Sample insights in each cluster show authentic stakeholder quotes. The integration section explicitly documents how each theme refined the Problem Tree—converting assumptions to evidence, adding new causes, and incorporating lessons from past failures. This level of detail makes your analysis defensible to funders and actionable for implementation.

Where else you'll see this: Examples

6. Synthesis Quality Indicators

graph TB
    Complete["📊 COMPLETE AFFINITY ANALYSIS<br/><br/>Ready for quality assessment"]

    subgraph Quality["✅ QUALITY INDICATORS"]
        Q1["Pattern Recognition<br/><br/>✓ Themes show genuine patterns<br/>✓ Some themes surprised you<br/>✓ Themes suggest interventions<br/>✓ Contradictions acknowledged"]

        Q2["Community Voice Preservation<br/><br/>✓ Themes use stakeholder language<br/>✓ Different perspectives captured<br/>✓ Cultural context evident<br/>✓ Power dynamics noted"]

        Q3["Integration Strength<br/><br/>✓ Problem Tree strengthened<br/>✓ Clear evidence trail<br/>✓ Community-grounded analysis<br/>✓ Foundation for Theory of Change"]

        Q4["Process Rigor<br/><br/>✓ Multiple stakeholder types<br/>✓ Systematic capture & clustering<br/>✓ Themes tested for quality<br/>✓ Documentation comprehensive"]
    end

    Check{"All quality<br/>indicators<br/>met?"}

    subgraph Pitfalls["⚠️ COMMON PITFALLS TO AVOID"]
        P1["Confirmation Bias<br/><br/>❌ Only validating assumptions<br/>❌ Dismissing contradictions<br/>❌ Cherry-picking quotes<br/>❌ Missing surprises"]

        P2["Over-Simplification<br/><br/>❌ Themes too broad<br/>❌ Combining distinct issues<br/>❌ Smoothing over contradictions<br/>❌ Losing important nuance"]

        P3["Analysis Paralysis<br/><br/>❌ Too many micro-themes<br/>❌ Stuck on perfect clustering<br/>❌ Failing to synthesize<br/>❌ Missing action implications"]
    end

    Pass["🎉 READY FOR LESSON 1.4<br/><br/>Strong foundation for<br/>Theory of Change development"]

    Refine["🔄 REFINE ANALYSIS<br/><br/>Address quality gaps<br/>or avoid pitfalls"]

    Complete --> Quality
    Quality --> Check
    Check -->|Yes| Pass
    Check -->|No| Pitfalls
    Pitfalls --> Refine
    Refine --> Quality

    style Complete fill:#F6F6F6,stroke:#737373,color:#2A2A2A
    style Quality fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style Q1 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Q2 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Q3 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Q4 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style Check fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A
    style Pitfalls fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style P1 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style P2 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style P3 fill:#FCA5A5,stroke:#E12729,color:#2A2A2A
    style Pass fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px
    style Refine fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff

Self-Assessment Framework

Before moving to Lesson 1.4, assess your synthesis quality using four indicators: pattern recognition (genuine insights emerged), community voice preservation (authentic language retained), integration strength (Problem Tree improved), and process rigor (systematic approach followed). The three common pitfalls—confirmation bias, over-simplification, and analysis paralysis—represent failure modes to actively avoid. If quality indicators aren't met, the refinement loop guides you back to strengthen your analysis before proceeding.

Where else you'll see this: Quality Checklist

7. Module 1 Culmination - Lessons 1.1 to 1.4 Integration

graph TB
    L11["📊 LESSON 1.1<br/>Problem Tree Analysis<br/><br/>Preliminary analysis:<br/>• Evidence from desk review<br/>• Assumptions identified<br/>• Validation questions prepared"]

    L12["🤝 LESSON 1.2<br/>Stakeholder Engagement<br/><br/>Community validation:<br/>• 30-80 insights collected<br/>• Multiple perspectives<br/>• Assumptions tested<br/>• New insights emerged"]

    L13["🧩 LESSON 1.3<br/>Affinity Diagram Synthesis<br/><br/>Pattern recognition:<br/>• 5-12 themes identified<br/>• Community priorities clear<br/>• Problem Tree refined<br/>• Evidence strengthened"]

    subgraph Outputs["📋 MODULE 1 OUTPUTS"]
        O1["Refined Problem Tree<br/><br/>• Community-validated<br/>• Evidence-based<br/>• Locally grounded<br/>• Credible analysis"]

        O2["Stakeholder Relationships<br/><br/>• Trust established<br/>• Partnerships forming<br/>• Ongoing engagement<br/>• Local ownership"]

        O3["Community Priorities<br/><br/>• Clear themes<br/>• Action implications<br/>• Success criteria<br/>• Intervention points"]

        O4["Evidence Foundation<br/><br/>• Multiple sources<br/>• Systematic analysis<br/>• Documented process<br/>• Audit trail"]
    end

    L14["🎯 LESSON 1.4<br/>Theory of Change<br/><br/>Transforms foundation into:<br/>• Impact vision<br/>• Outcome pathways<br/>• Activity logic<br/>• Change assumptions"]

    Module2["➡️ MODULE 2<br/>Operationalize<br/><br/>Community-grounded theory<br/>becomes implementation plan:<br/>• Logframe<br/>• Activities<br/>• Proposals<br/>• Budgets"]

    L11 --> L12
    L12 --> L13
    L13 --> Outputs

    O1 --> L14
    O2 --> L14
    O3 --> L14
    O4 --> L14

    L14 --> Module2

    L11 -.->|Provides structure| L13
    L12 -.->|Provides content| L13
    O1 -.->|Effects → Impact| L14
    O3 -.->|Priorities → Outcomes| L14

    style L11 fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,color:#fff
    style L12 fill:#F37324,stroke:#EA580C,color:#fff
    style L13 fill:#F8CC1B,stroke:#CA8A04,color:#2A2A2A,stroke-width:3px
    style Outputs fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:2px
    style O1 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style O2 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style O3 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style O4 fill:#72B043,stroke:#5b7c37,color:#fff
    style L14 fill:#007F4E,stroke:#00b369,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px
    style Module2 fill:#72B043,stroke:#007F4E,color:#fff,stroke-width:3px

Module 1 Completion: From Analysis to Action

This diagram shows how Lesson 1.3 (Affinity Synthesis) completes Module 1's foundation-building journey. Lesson 1.1 (red) provided structure through Problem Tree analysis. Lesson 1.2 (orange) brought community voices through stakeholder engagement. Lesson 1.3 (gold) synthesizes both into actionable intelligence. The four outputs—refined Problem Tree, stakeholder relationships, community priorities, and evidence foundation—converge in Lesson 1.4 to create your Theory of Change. This then flows into Module 2 where community-grounded theory becomes operational reality through Logframes, activities, proposals, and budgets.