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
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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.When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences.When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge.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
HighLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-5 Tage45-90 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
4-123-103-124-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsExpectation Map, Alignment Notes, AgreementsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods