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 System Dynamics Simulation |
|---|---|---|---|
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. | System Dynamics Simulation makes assumptions about time, delay, and feedback testable through experiments. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a simulation model and scenario reports. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 1-5 Modellierende, Stakeholder asynchron |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Simulation Model, Scenario Reports |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Systems thinkingDynamicsSimulationAnalysis |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
