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 Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
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.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
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45–75 min45-90 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-12Team members involved3-101-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions4Ls Board, Learning Themes, Improvement ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RetrospectiveLearningReflectionTeam
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods