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 an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument 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.IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-3 h20-45 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-122-81-81-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsIssue Map, Positions, Argument NotesOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
SensemakingDecisionRationale
Add more methods