Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Selected:Leverage Points ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)Evaporating Cloud Future Reality Tree

Criterion	Systems Thinking Leverage Points	Architecture ARID (Active Reviews for Intermediate Designs)	Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud	Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree
Purposedifferent	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.	ARID examines how well developers can work with a technical design. It focuses on a part of the system that can still be revised, between the architecture overview and the detailed specification.	The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict.	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.
Complexitydifferent	High	Medium	Medium	High
Timedifferent	Half day	2–4 h review as a planning range; preparation and evaluation additional	60-120 min	2-4 h
Participantsdifferent	3-12	Designers, developers as users, and facilitation	2-8	3-8
Formatdifferent	Workshop	Workshop + async	Workshop	Workshop
Outputdifferent	Leverage Map, Action Strategy	Prioritized development tasks, Jointly produced code or pseudocode, Observed difficulties and open design questions, Proposed design revisions	Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments	Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections
Tagsno overlap	Systems thinkingChangeStrategy	ArchitectureEngineeringFeedbackValidationTasks	Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking	Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange

Add more methods