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 |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Systems Thinking Soft Systems Methodology |  Facilitation Question Burst |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Soft Systems Methodology helps explore unclear or politically charged problems systematically. Instead of forcing a quick answer, the method builds a shared understanding of perspectives and room for action. | When a problem gets covered up too quickly with answers, Question Burst puts the better question at the center. The format opens the thinking space before the group commits to an interpretation. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 0.5-3 Tage | 15-30 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 5-15 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Rich Picture, Root Definitions, Conceptual Models, Change Agenda | Question List, Reframed Challenge, Learning Prompts |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Soft systemsComplexitySensemakingSystems thinking | QuestionsReframingFacilitationSensemaking |