View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion | ![]() Facilitation Mind Mapping | ![]() UX Research Empathy Mapping | ![]() Innovation Starbursting | ![]() Innovation Brainstorming |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. | 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 ideas, open questions, and testable next steps in concrete terms. It opens the thinking space, collects ideas, and leads to testable options. The result is captured as a star-shaped question map, question list, and assumption list. | When a team faces an open question with many obvious directions, the method first creates breadth instead of premature commitment. It separates idea flow from evaluation and makes lines of thought visible, creating a pool for selection and further development. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 15-45 min | 30–60 min | 30-60 min | 30-60 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1-10 | 4-8 | 3-10 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Star-Shaped Question Map, Question List, Assumption List | Idea pool, Theme clusters, Shortlist |
Tagsno overlap | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | BrainstormingIdeationWorkshopDiscovery | BrainstormingIdeationCreativityWorkshopDivergence |



