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 |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Facilitation Dot Estimation |  Decision Making Three-Point Estimation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | When size or effort can only be estimated roughly, Dot Estimation condenses the group's experience into a quick range. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as an Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, and Discussion Targets. | A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 15-45 min | 5-20 min | 10-30 min je Item |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-8 | 3-20 | 1-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | Effort Heatmap, Risk Signals, Discussion Targets | Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | EstimationEffortRisk | EstimationUncertaintyForecasting |