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 Empathy Mapping |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Domain Modeling EventStorming |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. | 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. | When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Medium | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-4 h | 2-8 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 5-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Event Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open Questions | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |