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
Runbook workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
Runbook
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
For recurring operational tasks or incidents, the method keeps solid action logic ready. It reduces uncertainty when time pressure, role changes, or rare situations demand fast access.When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
20-60 min45-90 min1-3 h1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
1-42-85-304-12
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Runbook, Checklist, Escalation PathDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
OperationsReliabilityDocumentation
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods