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 of a two-by-two Ansoff Matrix with four growth directions
Business Strategy
Ansoff Matrix
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of the McKinsey 7S Framework with seven connected fields
Business Strategy
McKinsey 7S
Paper illustration of Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Purposedifferent
The Ansoff Matrix organizes growth options by market and product relation. It helps weigh expansion, diversification, and adaptation cleanly against each other.In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving.McKinsey 7S checks whether Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff fit together. Organizational misalignments become visible across multiple levers as a result.In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min2-4 h90-180 min
Participantsdifferent
2-83-123-124-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ansoff Matrix, Growth Options, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes7S Assessment, Alignment Gaps, Change ActionsDecision Rights Matrix, Agreement
Tagsno overlap
GrowthStrategyMarketPortfolio
ChangeDecisionStrategy
OrganizationStrategyAlignmentChange
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
Add more methods