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 |  Facilitation Expectation Mapping |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Facilitation Alignment 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. | When roles, interfaces, or projects fail because of differing expectations, Expectation Mapping surfaces these differences. It shows what each side takes for granted and where the pictures diverge. | 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. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 4-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Expectation Map, Alignment Notes, Agreements | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | AlignmentStakeholdersTeam | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |