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 |  Agile Mad Sad Glad |  Facilitation Fishbowl Discussion |  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. | When a team's or workshop's mood needs to become readable, it structures emotional signals with little setup. It makes strain, relief, and sources of energy tangible. | When a controversial topic needs depth and discipline at the same time, Fishbowl Discussion makes the structure of the conversation transparent. The format keeps the core small enough for real dialogue and open enough for controlled turnover. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30-60 min | 45-90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 8-80 | 3-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Emotion Board, Themes, Action Items | Discussion Insights, Observed Tensions, Follow-up Questions | Start Stop Continue Board, Improvement Actions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RetrospectiveTeamReflection | FacilitationDialogueLarge group | RetrospectiveImprovementTeamReflection |