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 |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Facilitation Power Interest Grid |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 an initiative depends on many people, interests, and power dynamics, Stakeholder Mapping systematically orders the environment. It shows who influences, who is affected, and where relationship management or safeguarding matters first. | 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 many stakeholders compete for attention at once, the Power Interest Grid sorts them by influence and stake. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Power Interest Grid and a stakeholder-specific strategy. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min | 60–90 min | 45–90 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-8 | 2-8 | 3-10 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Power Interest Grid, Strategy per Stakeholder |
Tagsno overlap | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentPlanning |