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 |  Innovation Design Sprint |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 the product question is unclear and time pressure is high, the method takes a team from an open idea to a testable solution. It connects problem understanding, decision, and learning in one compact format, lowering the risk of spending a lot of energy on a mere guess. | 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. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | High | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 4-5 Tage | 30–60 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 5-8 | 4-8 | 4-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Prototype, Test Findings, Decision Rationale | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | Design sprintPrototypeValidationInnovation | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |