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 of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of Team API with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team API
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.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 expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document.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
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 minHalf day initial, dann laufend1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-122-8Ein Team plus Stakeholder4-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionTeam API DocumentAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods