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 the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of the McKinsey 7S Framework with seven connected fields
Business Strategy
McKinsey 7S
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.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.McKinsey 7S checks whether Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff fit together. Organizational misalignments become visible across multiple levers as a result.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min1-2 h2-4 h
Participantsdifferent
2-83-124-123-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions7S Assessment, Alignment Gaps, Change Actions
Tagsno overlap
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
OrganizationStrategyAlignmentChange
Add more methods