View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Business Strategy Strategy Map |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | A Strategy Map translates strategy into a few connected objectives across perspectives such as finance, customers, processes, and learning. This makes visible which capabilities and activities are meant to drive which results. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h workshop plus review | 45-90 min | 45-90 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-12 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Strategy Map, Objective Set, Cause-Effect Hypotheses | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentExecutionGoalsCausality | ChangeDecisionStrategy | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |