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
Four paper stations connect system purpose, quality goals, risk cards and focused investigation with a target and gap profile.
Architecture
LASR (Lightweight Approach for Software Reviews)
Paper illustration of Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
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.LASR helps development teams identify where their software falls short of important quality goals and which improvements to consider. A small group with existing system knowledge can make an initial assessment and investigate open questions in more detail.Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumHigh
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min3–4 h for initial assessment; preparation and deeper analysis additionalHalf day
Participantsdifferent
3-123-121 or a small team; particularly suitable for 3–4 people3-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk NotesLean Mission Statement describing the software’s purpose, Prioritized quality goals and evaluation criteria, Risks and estimated gaps against quality goals, More closely examined findings and open checksLeverage Map, Action Strategy
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
ChangeDecisionStrategy
ArchitectureQualityRiskAssessmentLean
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
Add more methods