View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Failure Scenario Analysis |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Systems Mapping |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In critical processes, it is not enough to plan only for the normal case. Failure Scenario Analysis looks at the path into failure and shows which failures, chains, and control gaps cause the most damage. | 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. | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Failure Scenarios, Risk Notes, Control Gaps, Test and Response Actions | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | FailureResilienceRisk | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |