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 |  UX Design Customer Journey Canvas |  UX Design Service Blueprinting |  UX Research Personas |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 journey needs to be understood across several phases, it arranges experience, touchpoints, and opportunities into one picture. It makes gaps and friction along the user path clear. | When a service experience is spread across several touchpoints, it brings frontstage and backstage together. It shows where user contact and internal responsibility must fit. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | High | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 1-3 h | 0.5-2 Tage | 1-3 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 3-10 | 6-12 | Internes Team |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Customer Journey Canvas, Pain Points, Experience Opportunities | Service Blueprint, Fail Points, Ownership Map | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | JourneyCustomerService designCanvas | Service designOperationsJourneyBlueprint | ResearchCustomerSynthesis |