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 System Dynamics Simulation |  Systems Thinking Polarity Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | System Dynamics Simulation makes assumptions about time, delay, and feedback testable through experiments. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a simulation model and scenario reports. | 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 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 | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | Mehrere Tage bis Wochen | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-5 Modellierende, Stakeholder asynchron | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Simulation Model, Scenario Reports | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingDynamicsSimulationAnalysis | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
