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 Radar |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  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. | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-10 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ChangeDecisionStrategy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |