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 Leverage Points |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |  Decision Making Delphi Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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 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 | Low | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | Half day | 45-90 min | 1-4 Wochen |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-12 | 3-12 | 6-30 Experten |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | ChangeDecisionStrategy | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy |