View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making PERT Estimation |  Systems Thinking Systems Mapping |  Agile Ideal Days |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | On complex initiatives, a plain average tends to understate just how uncertain the outcome really is. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a PERT Estimate, Expected Value, and Risk Notes. | 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 effort needs to be thought of as real working time, it offers a simple common denominator for comparison. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, and Capacity Caveats. | 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 | 15-45 min | 1-3 h | 15-60 min | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1-8 | 3-12 | 2-9 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | PERT Estimate, Expected Value, Risk Notes | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Ideal Day Estimates, Assumption Notes, Capacity Caveats | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | EstimationUncertaintyRisk | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | EstimationEffortAgile | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |