View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Systems Thinking Futures Wheel |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  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. | The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 60-120 min | 1-4 Wochen | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 6-30 Experten | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |