methodatlas
Compare

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 Mapping method illustration showing its working structure
Systems Thinking
Systems Mapping
Paper illustration for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
Paper illustration for Future Reality Tree.
Systems Thinking
Future Reality Tree
Purposedifferent
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.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.An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.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
MediumHighLowHigh
Timedifferent
1-3 h1-5 Tage15-45 min2-4 h
Participantsdifferent
3-124-121-33-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncAsyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
System Map, Dependencies, Leverage PointsLogic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanADR File, Decision Log, RationaleFuture Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange
Add more methods