View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Innovation How Might We |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Systems Thinking CATWOE Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | With a stuck problem carrying many implicit assumptions, the method translates observations into open, workable questions. It sharpens the problem frame without pre-thinking the solution, turning frustration or fuzziness into a search space with clear direction. | 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 change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | CATWOE structures a problem from six viewpoints and prevents too narrow a view of the situation. Different experiences of the system become comparably discussable this way. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–45 min | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | HMW Questions, Challenge Framing, Idea Prompts | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | CATWOE Canvas, Root Definition, Stakeholder Perspectives, Constraints |
Tagsno overlap | FramingOpportunityIdeationQuestions | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeDecisionStrategy | Systems thinkingFramingStakeholders |