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 CATWOE Analysis |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 60-120 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | ChangeDecisionStrategy |