View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Business Strategy McKinsey 7S |  Facilitation Stakeholder 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. | McKinsey 7S checks whether Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff fit together. Organizational misalignments become visible across multiple levers as a result. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 2-4 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | 7S Assessment, Alignment Gaps, Change Actions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationOptionsDecision | ChangeDecisionStrategy | OrganizationStrategyAlignmentChange | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |