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
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
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.DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-2 h1-4 Wochen45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-102-86-30 Experten3-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action AreasDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportExpert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption NotesForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
AssessmentPortfolioCapability
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
ChangeDecisionStrategy
Add more methods