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 Matrix |  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 several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic. | 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 | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 45-90 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 | Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected Option | Decision Frame, Decision Question, Criteria List, Evidence Plan | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs | Decision framingAlignmentCriteriaOptions | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |