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 Contextual Inquiry |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work processes are known only from accounts and the real context stays hidden, Contextual Inquiry makes behavior at the workplace visible. Observation and follow-up questions together show how people actually work, get interrupted, and improvise. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Wochen | 60–90 min | 1-3 h | 1-2 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-12 Beobachtungen | 2-8 | 5-30 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Field Notes, Workflow Insights, Pain Points | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions |
Tagsno overlap | UX researchObservationContext | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation |