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 Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-3 h1-2 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-121-82-82-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
SensemakingDecisionRationale
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
Add more methods