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 a Polarity Map with two poles and four quadrants
Systems Thinking
Polarity Mapping
A structured reflection surfaces what was liked, learned, lacked, and longed for. It is a conversation format and does not validate actions automatically.
Agile
4Ls Retrospective
Paper illustration for Current Reality Tree
Systems Thinking
Current Reality Tree
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Purposedifferent
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 a sprint should not only be assessed but also learned from, it captures experience in clear learning categories. It records what worked, what's missing, and what should run differently next time.A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once.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
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45–75 min2-6 h20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-12Team members involved3-81-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement ActionsCurrent Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention IdeasOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam
Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods