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 of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration for Trade-off Analysis.
Decision Making
Trade-off Analysis
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Purposedifferent
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.Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min45-120 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-122-82-82-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanTrade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted DownsidesDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report
Tags1 shared
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
Add more methods