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 the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
Paper illustration for Change Analysis.
Operations
Change Analysis
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.In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving.For a deviation after a change, the method isolates the influence of the altered condition. It narrows down which differences are relevant and which are just accompanying noise.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min45-120 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-122-62-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesChange Matrix, Cause Hypotheses, Validation Questions, Action ListDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
ChangeDecisionStrategy
ChangeRoot causeTroubleshootingComparison
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
Add more methods