View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Decision Making DACI |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  UX Research User Interviews |  Decision Making Decision Rights Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated. | 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 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. | In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30-60 min | 30–60 min | 30–60 min per interview | 90-180 min |
Participantsdifferent | 2-10 | 4-8 | 1 participant per interview | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | DACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Decision Rights Matrix, Agreement |
Tagsno overlap | DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility |