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 Dot Voting |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Decision Making Pareto Analysis |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | 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. | In many problem situations, effect is distributed unequally across many causes. A Pareto Analysis separates the few drivers with high leverage from the long remainder and focuses attention on what measurably moves the needle. | 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. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | 45–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | 4-8 | 1-6 | 3-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Pareto Chart, Top Causes, Focus List | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | PrioritizationQualityFocusRoot cause | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause |