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 |  Business Strategy GAP Analysis |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Product Strategy Impact 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. | GAP Analysis compares the current state with a target picture and makes the distance manageable. It becomes useful when, ahead of new initiatives, it must become clear which capabilities, processes, or resources are missing. | 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 a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 1-5 Tage | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 2-8 | 4-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Gap Matrix, Action Plan, Risk Notes | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | StrategyAnalysisPlanning | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning |