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 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Operations
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
Paper illustration for Current Reality Tree
Systems Thinking
Current Reality Tree
Paper illustration for Theory of Constraints Thinking Process.
Systems Thinking
Theory of Constraints Thinking Process
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 a process, product, or service with noticeable failure risks, the method assesses possible failure modes in advance. It directs attention to combinations of occurrence, effect, and detectability.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.The Theory of Constraints Thinking Process exposes a system's bottleneck and the logic behind it. It suits situations where many symptoms trace back to the same limiting relationship.
Complexitydifferent
MediumHighHighHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 h2-6 h2-6 h0.5-3 Tage
Participantsdifferent
3-123-103-84-10
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsFMEA Table, Risk Priority, Mitigation ActionsCurrent Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention IdeasCurrent Reality Logic, Conflict Cloud, Future Reality Tree, Implementation Obstacles
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RiskQualityOperationsRoot cause
Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality
Theory of ConstraintsConstraintsSystems thinkingCausality
Add more methods