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 for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
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.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.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.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
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min20-45 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-121-82-84-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods