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 Affinity Diagramming |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Operations 8D Problem Solving |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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. | When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | For an acute quality or delivery problem, the method structures immediate protection and root cause work together. It keeps the situation stable while the actual cause is investigated cleanly. | When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 1-3 h | 1-6 Wochen | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-30 | 4-10 | 4-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | 8D Report, Containment Plan, Root Cause Evidence, Corrective Action Plan | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | QualityProblem solvingRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |