methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of Leverage Points with its method-specific working model.
Systems Thinking
Leverage Points
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration for Intervention Mapping.
Systems Thinking
Intervention Mapping
Paper illustration for Future Reality Tree.
Systems Thinking
Future Reality Tree
Purposedifferent
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.When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
HighLowHighHigh
Timedifferent
Half day30–60 min per interview1-5 Tage2-4 h
Participantsdifferent
3-121 participant per interview4-123-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Leverage Map, Action StrategyInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryLogic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation PlanFuture Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections
Tagsno overlap
Systems thinkingChangeStrategy
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
ChangeSystems thinkingCapability
Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange
Add more methods