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 Futures Wheel with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Futures Wheel
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
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.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.When many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min45-90 min1-2 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-102-83-122-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionPolarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsRICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption Log
Tagsno overlap
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
Add more methods