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 |  Product Strategy RICE Scoring |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Product Strategy ICE Scoring |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 many initiatives compete for the same resources, it brings reach, impact, confidence, and effort into one shared ranking. It makes prioritization economically connectable. | 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 ideas need sorting quickly, it condenses impact, confidence, and effort into one compact score. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as an ICE table and top-ideas list. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 60-90 min | 45–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 2-10 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | RICE Scores, Ranked List, Assumption Log | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | ICE Table, Top Idea List |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | PrioritizationScoringRoadmapTradeoffs | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | PrioritizationScoringGrowthDecision |