View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Product Strategy DIBB |  Decision Making Delphi Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | In change initiatives, supporting and restraining forces sit at the table at the same time. Force Field Analysis makes these tensions explicit and shows where change can be pushed forward by strengthening or relieving. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | When knowledge is distributed and direct dominance should be avoided, groups quickly fall under the sway of their opinion leaders. The Delphi Method gathers assessments iteratively and gradually brings expert judgments closer together. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 45-90 min | 1-2 h | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-12 | 2-8 | 6-30 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Async |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | ChangeDecisionStrategy | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy |