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 Constraint Analysis |  Decision Making Decision Framing Workshop |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative stalls, the limit often lies not in the idea but in hard or soft boundary conditions. Constraint Analysis separates these limits and shows which of them can actually be shaped. | When a decision is poorly framed, even good answers deliver little value. A Decision Framing Workshop sharpens the problem, goal, and boundaries before the actual weighing begins. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 30-90 min | 60-120 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 2-8 | 4-10 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Constraint List, Hard/Soft Classification, Option Impact Notes, Decision Boundaries | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ConstraintsDecisionPlanningOptions | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |