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 Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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. | When many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 45–90 min | 60–90 min | 1-3 h | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-10 | 2-8 | 5-30 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |