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 for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Purposedifferent
Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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.Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.
Complexitydifferent
HighHighLowLow
Timedifferent
1-5 Tage1-4 h45-90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-123-83-122-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
RiskDecisionSensemaking
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods