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 Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.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 group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
Half day5-15 min45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-123-203-125-30
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Leverage Map, Action StrategyRanked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
ChangeDecisionStrategy
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods