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 Personas |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Option Framing |  Facilitation Stakeholder Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When target groups stay too vague and teams talk about the same people differently, personas create a shared, solid picture of usage. Condensed profiles make needs, contexts, and differences tangible enough for decisions. | When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable. | In early decisions, alternatives are often still vague, incomplete, or blended together. Option Framing brings every possibility into a comparable form and makes visible which variant actually fits the question. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-2 h | 45-120 min | 60–90 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 4-12 | 3-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs | Stakeholder Map, Engagement Plan, Risk Notes |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison | StakeholdersAlignmentFacilitationChange |