View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making Constraint Analysis |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | 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. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30-90 min | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | ChangeDecisionStrategy | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |