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 the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
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.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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowMedium
Timedifferent
Half day45-90 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-125-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Leverage Map, Action StrategyForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
ChangeDecisionStrategy
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for OODA Loop.
Decision Making
OODA Loop
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping