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 Systems Mapping |  Architecture Architecture Decision Record |  Systems Thinking Intervention 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. | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 15-45 min | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 3-12 | 1-3 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | ADR File, Decision Log, Rationale | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |