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 Polarity Mapping |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Business Strategy GAP Analysis |  Product Strategy Impact Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Polarity Mapping makes tensions between two opposing poles tangible, such as standardization and adaptation or control and autonomy. The method guards against making apparent either-or decisions prematurely. | 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. | GAP Analysis compares the current state with a target picture and makes the distance manageable. It becomes useful when, ahead of new initiatives, it must become clear which capabilities, processes, or resources are missing. | When a goal needs to be connected to several possible paths, it shows chains of impact instead of feature lists. It connects business goal, behavior change, and measures. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-5 Tage | 1-3 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Polarity Map, Warning Signs, Balance Actions | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Gap Matrix, Action Plan, Risk Notes | Impact Map, Outcome Hypotheses, Delivery Options |
Tagsno overlap | Systems thinkingTradeoffsLeadership | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | StrategyAnalysisPlanning | OutcomesStrategyBehaviorPlanning |