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 |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 1-5 Tage | 1-3 h | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 4-12 | 5-30 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Radar Map, Capability Scores, Action Areas | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | AssessmentPortfolioCapability | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |