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 of Power-Interest Grid with a method-specific labelled workspace.
Facilitation
Power Interest Grid
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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy.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
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h45-90 min30-60 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-102-81-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsPower Interest Grid, Strategy per StakeholderOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods