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 Goal Question Metric with its method-specific working model.
Engineering
Goal Question Metric
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of Counter Metrics with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
Counter Metrics
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify technical problems, hypotheses, and next steps in concrete terms. It breaks a technical problem into testable parts. The result is captured as a GQM table and metric briefs.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.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 a headline metric could mask side effects, it adds guardrail signals against unwanted outcomes. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a counter-metric list and guardrail definitions.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
90-180 min1-2 h45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-64-123-122-6
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
GQM Table, Metric ProfilesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesCounter Metric List, Guardrail Definitions
Tagsno overlap
MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
ChangeDecisionStrategy
MetricsMeasurementStrategyExperiments
Add more methods