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
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
2-4 h60–90 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
2-82-83-124-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Competency Question Set, Required Concepts, Test Queries, Coverage MatrixStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
OntologyKnowledge graphScopeRequirementsSemantic
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods