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 DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.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.In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement.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 min1-2 h90-180 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-122-84-124-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportDecision Rights Matrix, AgreementAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
ChangeDecisionStrategy
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods