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 Evaporating Cloud |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | Mehrere Wochen | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-10 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | InnovationPrototypeResearch | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |