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 a calibrated five-by-five risk matrix with response cards.
Decision Making
Risk Matrix
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
Decision Making
Assumption Surfacing
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Purposedifferent
When a project faces many possible disruptions, it quickly becomes unclear which risks deserve attention first. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Risk Matrix and a Top Risk List.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.Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it.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.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
30-60 min45-90 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-103-122-82-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Risk Matrix, Top Risk ListForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning PlanDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report
Tags1 shared
RiskDecisionPrioritizationAssessment
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
Add more methods