View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ChangeDecisionStrategy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |