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 Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
Paper illustration for Cynefin Workshop.
Decision Making
Cynefin Workshop
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences.When problems are unclear, chaotic, or only seemingly familiar, standard recipes fall short. A Cynefin Workshop sorts situations by the nature of their problem and connects them with matching action logic.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min60-180 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-104-201-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsCynefin Map, Domain-specific Actions, Sensemaking NotesOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
ComplexitySensemakingDecision
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods