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 matrix with six colored hat cards for information, feeling, value, caution, ideas and process control.
Facilitation
Six Thinking Hats
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together.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.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 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
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min30-90 min45-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
4-121-63-124-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action ItemsDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationOptionsDecision
DecisionTreeOptions
ChangeDecisionStrategy
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods