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
Iceberg Model method illustration showing its working structure
Systems Thinking
Iceberg Model
Paper illustration of a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Purposedifferent
The Iceberg Model separates visible events from patterns, structures, and mental models. This turns a single observation into a deeper understanding of why a problem keeps recurring.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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30-60 min1-2 h45-90 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
2-103-123-101-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Iceberg Worksheet, Pattern Notes, Intervention IdeasPolarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingRoot causePatterns
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods