View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-3 | 4-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |