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 Radar |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When capabilities, maturity levels, or market positions need to be compared across several dimensions, overview is easily lost. Radar brings different characteristics into a shared picture and shows patterns faster than tables do. | 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. | When statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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 | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-5 Tage | 1-3 h | 2-4 h |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 4-12 | 1-8 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | SensemakingDecisionRationale | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange |