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 |  Facilitation Dot Voting |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 5-15 min | 2-4 h | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-20 | 3-8 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |