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 Futures Wheel |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Knowledge Modeling IBIS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Futures Wheel helps explore the consequences of a decision, a trend, or a strategic move in a structured way. It makes visible which first, second, and third-order effects could arise from an event. | 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. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-5 Tage | 1-3 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-12 | 1-8 | 2-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Issue Map, Positions, Argument Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | SensemakingDecisionRationale | RationaleKnowledgeDecision |