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 Salience Model |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60-90 min | 2-4 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 3-6 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |