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
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument 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.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.For a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability.When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighHighMedium
Timedifferent
60-120 min1-4 h2-6 h1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-103-83-101-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic SignalsChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
ForesightSystems thinkingSignals
RiskDecisionSensemaking
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods