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 an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Rich Picture workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Systems Thinking
Rich Picture
Paper illustration of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
Paper illustration for CATWOE Analysis.
Systems Thinking
CATWOE Analysis
Purposedifferent
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.A Rich Picture brings an unclear situation onto a shared drawing. It captures actors, tensions, information flows, and blind spots before the team jumps to solutions too early.When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-3 h30-90 min30-60 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-82-102-83-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesRich Picture, Problem Framing NotesPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderCATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
Systems thinkingSoft systemsFramingVisualization
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders
Add more methods