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 Nominal Group Technique |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Facilitation 1-2-4-All |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting. | 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 people in a group too rarely get to speak, 1-2-4-All distributes thinking time more fairly. The format builds participation step by step and makes quiet or still-unformed thoughts usable faster. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 60-120 min | 30–60 min | 10-20 min |
Participantsdifferent | 5-12 | 4-8 | 4-100+ |
Formatsame | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Ranked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Idea List, Shared Insights, Emergent Themes |
Tagsno overlap | FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | FacilitationInclusionIdeation |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
