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 Intervention Mapping |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Systems Thinking Systems Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | 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. | Systems Mapping arranges elements, relationships, and boundaries so a complex field becomes legible at a glance. The overview stabilizes the overall picture before detail work or steering begins. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. |
Complexitydifferent | High | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-5 Tage | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 | 4-8 | 3-12 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | System Map, Dependencies, Leverage Points | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Systems thinkingMappingBoundariesChange | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |