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
Systems Mapping method illustration showing its working structure
Systems Thinking
Systems Mapping
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
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.Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins.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 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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h1-3 h45-90 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-123-123-101-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsSystem Map, Dependencies, Leverage PointsResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open QuestionsOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods