Option Map — Hierarchical Comparison (Infographic)
Best for: comparing two option families where each side has a few structured sub-dimensions rather than flat bullets Avoid when: the comparison is purely numeric or the reader needs more than two top-level options Answers: how the two option groups are structured, and which sub-areas belong under each one
infographic compare-hierarchy-left-right-circle-node-plain-text
theme
colorPrimary #2b66c4
palette
- #2b66c4
- #2f9e44
- #f3a33c
- #d1242f
- #7048e8
- #0f9b9b
- #c16f8a
- #7c5a3d
data
title Operating Model Options
desc Two structured options with distinct capability groupings
compares
- label Central Platform
children
- label Shared Tooling
- label Policy Control
- label Standardized Release Flow
- label Federated Product Teams
children
- label Local Ownership
- label Flexible Delivery Cadence
- label Domain-Specific ToolingData Shape
Use compares with two top-level options, each containing a small children set for its sub-structure.
Key Options
| Option | Effect |
|---|---|
compare-hierarchy-left-right-circle-node-plain-text |
Structured left/right comparison rather than a flat A/B list |
Nested children |
Shows the decomposition under each compared side |
| Simple labels | Keeps the hierarchy readable inside the comparison layout |
Pitfalls
- ❌ Using long descriptions for every child node → ✅ this pattern works best with compact labeled dimensions
- ❌ Comparing many top-level options in a binary hierarchy template → ✅ keep it to two structured choices
- ❌ Treating it as a numeric score model | ✅ it is a structural framing artifact |
Alternatives
| Variant | Use instead |
|---|---|
| Flat pros/cons A vs B | buy-vs-build-comparison.md |
| SWOT framing | market-entry-swot.md |
| Rich table comparison | decision-comparison-card.md |