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
Anonymous individual judgments pass through feedback loops to form a distribution.
Decision Making
Delphi Method
Paper illustration of a scoring table with four factor columns, a calculator and three ordered initiative cards.
Product Strategy
RICE Scoring
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
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 knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together.When many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-4 Wochen60-90 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
3-126-30 Experten2-102-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsExpert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption NotesRICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption LogDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy
PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
Add more methods