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 |  Delivery RAID Log |  Decision Making Red Teaming |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 1-4 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Challenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation Plan | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | RiskDecisionSensemaking | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |