View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | When an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 60-120 min | 60–90 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 2-8 | 2-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |