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
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Paper illustration for Current Reality Tree
Systems Thinking
Current Reality Tree
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.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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowHighHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 h20-45 min2-6 h2-6 h
Participantsdifferent
3-121-83-103-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsCurrent Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality
Add more methods