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 Intervention Mapping |  Product Discovery Outcome-Driven Innovation |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. |
Complexitysame | High | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage | Mehrere Wochen | Half day |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-12 | 2-6 researchers plus sample | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Desired outcome statements, Opportunity landscape, Segmentation by underserved needs, Innovation hypotheses | Leverage Map, Action Strategy |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | OutcomesInnovationResearchQuantitative | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy |