methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
20-45 min45-90 min15-45 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
1-83-121-34-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesExpectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsADR File, Decision Log, RationaleAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods