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 |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 30–60 min | 60-90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 4-8 | 3-6 | 5-30 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |