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
Paper illustration of Team API with its method-specific working model.
Team Design
Team API
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
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.When expectations between teams stay fuzzy, it describes how a team can be reached, used, and held accountable. It clarifies responsibility, interaction, and load between teams. The result is captured as a Team API document.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 hHalf day initial, dann laufend15-45 min20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-12Ein Team plus Stakeholder1-31-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsTeam API DocumentADR File, Decision Log, RationaleOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods