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 of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
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 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.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.When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min45-90 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-122-83-104-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods