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 Leverage Points |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Systems Thinking Current Reality Tree |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 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. | A Current Reality Tree condenses many symptoms into a few causal chains. The method makes visible which core problems drive several negative effects at once. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | High | Low | High |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | Half day | 45–90 min | 2-6 h |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-12 | 3-10 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Leverage Map, Action Strategy | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Current Reality Tree, Core Problems, Intervention Ideas |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | Systems thinkingChangeStrategy | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Systems thinkingRoot causeConstraintsCausality |