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 a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Purposedifferent
When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min1-2 h60–90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-82-82-83-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
ChangeDecisionStrategy
Add more methods