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 |  UX Research Personas |  Facilitation Stakeholder Salience Model |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | 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 stakeholders appear to matter very differently, the Stakeholder Salience Model rates their actual priority through power, legitimacy, and urgency. It turns individual contributions into a visible selection. The result is captured as a Salience diagram and a class-based strategy. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-2 h | 1-3 Tage | 60-90 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 4-12 | Internes Team | 3-6 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Alignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions | Persona Profiles, Needs Summary, Scenario Notes | Salience Diagram, Strategy per Class |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation | ResearchCustomerSynthesis | StakeholdersFacilitationAlignmentGovernance |