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 Theory of Change |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | Theory of Change translates a desired impact into a traceable chain of change. It makes assumptions, intermediate goals, and measurement points visible before a program is rolled out at scale. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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. | Leverage Points show exactly where interventions in a system produce a disproportionate effect. It draws relationships, patterns, and feedback loops. The result is captured as a leverage map and action strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Medium | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 2-6 h | 1-2 h | 60–90 min | Half day |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-12 | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theory of Change Map, Assumptions, Outcome Measures | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Leverage Map, Action Strategy |
Tagsno overlap | ImpactOutcomesSystems thinkingStrategy | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy |