View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Team Design Spotify Model Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When a team landscape has grown without clear grouping, it maps roles and relationships onto the Spotify model. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Spotify model map and action list. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-2 h | 90-180 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-12 | 5-15 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Spotify Model Map, Action List | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | TeamOrganizationAlignmentDiagnosis | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |