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 for Incident Timeline Analysis.
DevOps
Incident Timeline Analysis
Paper illustration for Sailboat Retrospective
Agile
Sailboat Retrospective
Paper illustration of a team retrospective with three separate Start, Stop, and Continue areas and a shared action list.
Agile
Start Stop Continue
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.For an incident with an unclear sequence, the method makes the timeline precisely visible. It separates perception, reaction, and delay so cause and effect become more clearly readable.When a team wants to read momentum, brakes, and risks together, it offers an easily understandable picture of the situation. It makes drive, obstacles, and headwind visible in the same picture.When a team wants to deliberately adjust its working behavior, it makes habits visible and assessable. It focuses on concrete changes instead of diffuse mood.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h60-180 min45-90 min30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-104-123-12
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsIncident Timeline, Evidence Log, Delay Analysis, Improvement ActionsSailboat Board, Risks, Improvement ActionsStart Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
IncidentTimelineSite Reliability Engineering
RetrospectiveTeamImprovement
RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection
Add more methods