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 |  Delivery RAID Log |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | Helps clarify scope, sequence, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, boundaries, and order steerable. The result is captured as a RAID Log and a source for status reporting. | 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. | When stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 30 min Setup, dann laufend | 1-3 h | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 1-3 maintaining, briefing for everyone | 5-30 | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | RAID Log, Status Report Source | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | RiskTrackingStakeholdersGovernance | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |