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 Personas |  Facilitation Nominal Group Technique |  Product Discovery Kano Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 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 loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 5-15 min | 1-3 Tage | 60-120 min | 1-2 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 3-20 | Internes Team | 5-12 | 10-50 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority Themes |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer |