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 |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Architecture Risk Storming |
|---|---|---|---|
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 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. | Helps clarify architecture context, options, and consequences in concrete terms. It organizes technical context, alternatives, and consequences. The result is captured as an Annotated Diagram, a Prioritized Risk List, and an Action Backlog. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 5-30 | 4-12 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Annotated Diagram, Prioritized Risk List, Action Backlog |
Tags1 shared | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | RiskArchitectureWorkshopValidation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
