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 radar with five axes, two current and target profiles, and evidence cards beside each dimension.
Decision Making
Radar
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Purposedifferent
When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do.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 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.When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h30-90 min1-2 h30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
2-101-64-122-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
DecisionTreeOptions
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
Add more methods