methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Paper illustration for Future Reality Tree.
Systems Thinking
Future Reality Tree
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Paper illustration of the Force Field Analysis working structure.
Decision Making
Force Field Analysis
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.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 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.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighHighMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-5 Tage2-4 h1-3 h45-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-123-81-83-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanFuture Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved InjectionsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleForce Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes
Tagsno overlap
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange
SensemakingDecisionRationale
ChangeDecisionStrategy
Add more methods