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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  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. | 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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based 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 | Low | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60–90 min | 60-90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |