View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research Personas |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails. | 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 target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-2 h | 30–60 min | 1-3 Tage | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-8 | 4-8 | Internes Team | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | AlignmentArchitectureCanvas | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |