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 Intervention Mapping |  Innovation Design Thinking |  Innovation Double Diamond |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | For complex user problems with an uncertain cause, the method connects observation, interpretation, and experiment into a learning cycle. It keeps the focus on real needs and avoids premature solution language. This produces robust decisions for product and service. | For complex problems with a fuzzy situation, the method cleanly separates search space and decision. It first creates breadth in understanding and then focus in elaboration. This brings open questions, problem definition, and solution path into a traceable movement. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 1 Tag bis mehrere Wochen | Wochen bis Monate | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-10 | 3-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Problem Statement, Prototype, Test Learnings | Problem Statement, Solution Options, Prototypes, Deliverables per Phase | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | InnovationPrototypeResearch | ProcessDivergenceInnovation | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |