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 Future Reality Tree |  Decision Making Delphi Method |  Decision Making Force Field Analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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. | 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. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 2-4 h | 1-4 Wochen | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-8 | 6-30 Experten | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Expert Forecast, Consensus Range, Assumption Notes | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ForecastingExpertsDecisionStrategy | ChangeDecisionStrategy |