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 Empathy Mapping |  Decision Making Argument Mapping |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  Facilitation Decision Jam |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | 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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on. | 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 decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 60–90 min | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-8 | 2-8 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Argument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision Rationale | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | SensemakingDecisionRationale | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop |