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 of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of the McKinsey 7S Framework with seven connected fields
Business Strategy
McKinsey 7S
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.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.McKinsey 7S checks whether Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff fit together. Organizational misalignments become visible across multiple levers as a result.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
90-180 min45-90 min2-4 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-63-123-124-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
GQM Table, Metric ProfilesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes7S Assessment, Alignment Gaps, Change ActionsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment
ChangeDecisionStrategy
OrganizationStrategyAlignmentChange
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods