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 Consensus Workshop |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Facilitation 3-Circle Venn Diagram |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time. | 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 three perspectives matter at the same time, a Three-Circle Venn Diagram shows the overlaps and remainders precisely. It makes visible where shared effect arises and where only a partial perspective applies. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 1-3 h | 30–60 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 5-30 | 4-8 | 2-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Venn Diagram, Overlap Notes, Differentiators |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | ComparisonFacilitationAlignment |