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 Decision Rights Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 90-180 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-12 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility | ChangeDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |