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 Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
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.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.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
MediumLowHighLow
Timedifferent
1-2 hHalf day initial, dann laufendHalf day20-45 min
Participantsdifferent
3-12Ein Team plus Stakeholder3-121-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsTeam API DocumentLeverage Map, Action StrategyOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching Notes
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
TeamAlignmentCommunicationService
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
Add more methods