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 |  Business Strategy Scenario Planning |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Scenario Planning opens the view to several plausible futures instead of a single forecast. The method protects strategies from depending on too narrow an expected path. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 0.5-2 Tage | Half day | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Scenario Set, Strategic Implications, Robust Options | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | StrategyUncertaintyPlanning | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |