View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  UX Research User Interviews |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 h | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-30 | 1 participant per interview | 4-12 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |