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 |  Business Strategy Scenario Planning |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Scenario Planning opens the view to several plausible futures instead of a single forecast. The method protects strategies from depending on too narrow an expected path. | When a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 60-120 min | 0.5-2 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 4-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Scenario Set, Strategic Implications, Robust Options | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | StrategyUncertaintyPlanning | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning |