This qualitative research employs George Bereday's comparative method in four stages: description, interpretation, juxtaposition, and comparison. Data were collected through triangulation of sources, including credible international documents, semi-structured interviews, and a three-round Delphi technique. The findings reveal that in Finland, with its decentralized and teacher-centered approach, educational needs assessment relies on qualitative tools such as focus groups and formative evaluations. In contrast, Singapore, with its centralized and data-driven structure, utilizes labor market analysis, national surveys, and predictive modeling. Despite these differences, both systems emphasize foresight and adaptation to economic and cultural changes. Conversely, Iran's educational system, due to centralization and over-reliance on traditional tools, performs below the global average. Based on these insights, the proposed hybrid model for Iran comprises three components: (1) broad stakeholder engagement through regional councils, (2) use of mixed tools including qualitative interviews and big data analysis, and (3) cultural adaptation through pilot implementation in five selected provinces. This model, inspired by the strengths of Finland and Singapore, has been validated by domestic and international experts (90% consensus in the third Delphi round). The research innovation lies in presenting a localized and operational model that bridges the gap in previous studies by combining Bereday's method and the Delphi technique for consensus-building in educational needs assessment.