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 Intervention Mapping |  Product Strategy DIBB |  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. | 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. | DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report. | 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 | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-5 Tage | 1-2 h | 45-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 4-12 | 2-8 | 3-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan | DIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning report | Force Field Map, Change Levers, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability | StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis | ChangeDecisionStrategy |