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 Evaporating Cloud |  UX Research Contextual Inquiry |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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. | 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. | 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 | Medium | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 1-3 Wochen | Half day | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-8 | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | UX researchObservationContext | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |