View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Operations Accountability Ladder |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on. | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 20-45 min | 1-2 h | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 1-8 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Ownership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |