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 Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | High | High | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage | Half day |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 3-8 | 4-12 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Leverage Map, Action Strategy |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy |