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 Futures Wheel |  Decision Making Decision Matrix |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event. | When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 45-90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions |
Tagsno overlap | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | RationaleKnowledgeDecision | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership |