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 |  Product Discovery Riskiest Assumption Test |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Product Discovery Fake Door Test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an idea hinges on one critical unknown, it prioritizes testing that exact piece of uncertainty first. It separates problem, assumption, solution, and evidence. The result is captured as a prioritized list of assumptions, a test plan, and a result report. | 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 demand is still unclear, it measures interest in a feature before it is built. It separates real behavior from polite agreement and deliberately keeps build effort small. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 Wochen pro Iteration | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 2-6 | 3-8 | Nutzertraffic |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Prioritized Assumption List, Test Plan, Results Report | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Click Data, Interest Signal, Learning Decision |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | ExperimentsValidationDiscoveryAssumptions | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ValidationExperimentsDemandDiscovery |