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 for Three-Point Estimation.
Decision Making
Three-Point Estimation
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Responsibility Poker.
Facilitation
Responsibility Poker
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.A single estimate for effort, time, or risk often looks too smooth for the real uncertainty behind it. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Three-Point Estimate, Risk Range, and Assumption Notes.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 h10-30 min je Item20-45 min45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-121-81-83-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance ActionsThree-Point Estimate, Risk Range, Assumption NotesOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesResponsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership
EstimationUncertaintyForecasting
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation
Add more methods