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 Personas |  Systems Thinking Evaporating Cloud |  Systems Thinking Leverage Points |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | The method makes visible why two seemingly incompatible demands arise and which assumption must be tested to resolve the conflict. | 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 | 1-3 Tage | 60-120 min | Half day | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 2-8 | 3-12 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Conflict Cloud, Assumption List, Breakthrough Ideas, Next Experiments | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Theory of ConstraintsAssumptionsSystems thinking | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |