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 |  Product Strategy KPI Tree |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder 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 metrics across the organization drift apart, it arranges drivers and effects under one shared logic. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a KPI tree and owner list. | 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. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 90-180 min initial, dann laufend | 1-2 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-8 | 4-12 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | KPI Tree, Owner List | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | MetricsStrategyAlignmentMeasurement | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |