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 a branching impact map with a Why goal at the root, actor circles, How behavior changes and What options.
Product Strategy
Impact Mapping
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Stakeholder Mapping
Facilitation
Stakeholder Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Purposedifferent
When a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min30-90 min60–90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-81-62-83-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery OptionsDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListStakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning
DecisionTreeOptions
StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange
ChangeDecisionStrategy
Add more methods