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 illustration of Team Cognitive Load Assessment with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team Cognitive Load Assessment
Paper illustration for Future Reality Tree.
Systems Thinking
Future Reality Tree
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration for Expectation Mapping.
Facilitation
Expectation Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a team juggles too many domains, systems, or handoffs, it measures mental overload as an organizational problem. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a cognitive-load profile and action list.A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation.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.When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min2-4 h1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-84-123-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Cognitive Load Profile, Action ListFuture Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved InjectionsAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsExpectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements
Tagsno overlap
TeamComplexityImprovementDiagnosis
Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
AlignmentStakeholdersTeam
Add more methods