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 a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
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.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.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 knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowHigh
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min1-2 h1-4 Wochen
Participantsdifferent
3-122-82-86-30 Experten
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsync
Outputdifferent
Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportExpert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes
Tags1 shared
ChangeDecisionStrategy
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
Add more methods