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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Paper illustration for Current Reality Tree
Systems Thinking
Current Reality Tree
Paper illustration for Trade-off Analysis.
Decision Making
Trade-off Analysis
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.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h30-90 min2-6 h45-120 min
Participantsdifferent
3-121-63-82-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListCurrent Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention IdeasTrade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
DecisionTreeOptions
Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality
TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions
Add more methods