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 Responsibility Poker |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Facilitation Delegation Poker |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | When decisions get stuck between leadership and team, Delegation Poker clarifies the desired scope of autonomy. It shows how much decision-making latitude a role should actually get in practice. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | 60-120 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 3-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Delegation Board, Decision Boundaries, Role Agreements |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | AutonomyRolesTeam |