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 Customer Journey Mapping |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Architecture Architecture Inception Canvas |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a user journey falls apart across many touchpoints, customer journey mapping makes the experience visible as a coherent arc. Phases, emotions, and breaks become legible enough to prioritize critical moments deliberately. | 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. | The Architecture Inception Canvas bundles the first architecture questions into a compact decision picture. It fits when an initiative is still in motion but still needs clear guardrails. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 2-4 h | 45–90 min | 1-2 h | 30–60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 4-10 | 3-10 | 3-8 | 4-8 |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Journey Map, Pain-point List, Opportunity Backlog | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Inception Canvas, Risks, Goal List, Open Questions | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps |
Tagsno overlap | JourneyServiceService design | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | AlignmentArchitectureCanvas | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop |