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 Systems Mapping |  Facilitation Responsibility Poker |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | When it stays unclear who carries responsibility and who only contributes, Responsibility Poker makes the distribution of responsibility explicit. It sharpens the boundaries between weighing in, deciding, and bearing consequences. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 1-3 h | 45-90 min | Half day |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Responsibility Map, Role Agreements, Open Questions | Leverage Map, Action Strategy |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | RolesResponsibilityTeamFacilitation | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy |