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 |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  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. | 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. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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 | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |