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
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
45-90 min45-90 min30-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
4-123-121-64-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action ItemsForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationOptionsDecision
ChangeDecisionStrategy
DecisionTreeOptions
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods