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 |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | Outcome-Driven Innovation clarifies customer problems, solution opportunities, and evidence. It separates jobs, desired outcomes, importance, satisfaction, and opportunity, and captures results as desired outcome statements, an opportunity landscape, and segments by underserved needs. | 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 | High | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 60-120 min | Mehrere Wochen | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |