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 |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 60-120 min | 1-2 h | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking |