View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking CATWOE Analysis |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. | 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. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | ChangeDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |