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 |  Decision Making Trade-off Analysis |  Facilitation Six Thinking Hats |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | With limited resources, quality, speed, cost, and risk almost always compete with each other. Trade-off Analysis makes these tensions explicit and prevents decisions from producing hidden side effects. | When a topic gets stuck too quickly in the same thinking mode, Six Thinking Hats deliberately separates the perspectives. This means facts, risks, creativity, and emotional signals get worked through one after another instead of mixed together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 45-90 min | 45-120 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Trade-off Matrix, Criteria List, Decision Rationale, Accepted Downsides | Perspective Notes, Decision Inputs, Action Items |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | TradeoffsDecisionCriteriaOptions | FacilitationOptionsDecision |