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 |  Agile ROAM Board |  UX Research Empathy Mapping |  Facilitation Consensus Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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 work needs to move between different states or columns, it makes that movement and its handoffs legible. It sorts work by value, risk, and delivery ability. The result is captured as a ROAM Board and an Owner List. | 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 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 1-3 Tage | 20-40 min initial, dann laufend | 30–60 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | Internes Team | 3-15 | 4-8 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | ROAM Board, Owner List | Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | RiskAgileTrackingAlignment | SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |