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 |  Decision Making Pre-Mortem |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |  Decision Making Assumption Surfacing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In early initiatives with many uncertainties, planning quickly turns too optimistic. A pre-mortem makes the expected failure visible in advance and sharpens the view of causes, gaps, and countermeasures. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. | Plans often contain assumptions that were never openly stated and remain dangerous precisely because of that. Assumption Surfacing makes these silent premises visible and prioritizes which of them carry the initiative or could sink it. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 20–45 min | 2-6 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | Small cross-functional group | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Risk list, Mitigation plan, Assumption log | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas | Assumption List, Critical Assumptions, Learning Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | RiskDecisionFailurePlanning | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality | AssumptionsRiskDecisionDiscovery |