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 Decision Framing Workshop |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  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 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 research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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 | Medium | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 60-120 min | 45–90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 4-10 | 3-10 | 5-30 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |