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 User Interviews |  Facilitation Alignment Mapping |  Decision Making Option Framing |
|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h | 45-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 4-12 | 3-8 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Option Frames, Assumption Notes, Comparable Shortlist, Decision Inputs |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | OptionsDecision framingStrategyComparison |
Often compared together
Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.
