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 Competency Questions with its method-specific working model.
Knowledge Modeling
Competency Questions
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 DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Purposedifferent
Competency Questions translate a domain model into concrete questions that it must be able to answer. The method keeps the model's scope clean and prevents pretty but useless structures.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
2-4 h45-90 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
2-82-83-122-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Competency Question Set, Required Concepts, Test Queries, Coverage MatrixAnsoff Matrix, Growth Options, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report
Tagsno overlap
OntologyKnowledge graphScopeRequirementsSemantic
GrowthStrategyMarketPortfolio
ChangeDecisionStrategy
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
Add more methods