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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Purposedifferent
For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30-90 min1-2 h60–90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-64-122-83-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
DecisionTreeOptions
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
ChangeDecisionStrategy
Add more methods