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
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of an assumption matrix with prioritized test cards
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.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.When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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
MediumHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-4 h45-90 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-82-82-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionAssumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RiskDecisionSensemaking
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery
Add more methods