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 |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 | High | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 2-4 h | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-8 | 5-30 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |