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 User Interviews |  Product Discovery Opportunity Interview |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities. | 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. | 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 | Low | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 30-60 min je Interview | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 5-12 Interviews | 3-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Interview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer Quotes | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |