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 Future Reality Tree |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. | 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. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis |