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 |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Facilitation Decision Jam |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | When a decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 2-4 h | 45-90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-8 | 3-12 | 4-10 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeDecisionStrategy | FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop |