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 |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |  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. | 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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. | 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 | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-5 Tage | 30-60 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |