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 |  Architecture Software Architecture Canvas |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-2 h | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 3-10 | 5-30 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Futures Wheel, Consequence Chains, Strategic Signals | Architecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality Attributes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ForesightSystems thinkingSignals | CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |