methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration for Accountability Ladder
Operations
Accountability Ladder
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
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 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.With defensive reactions to problems, the method shifts the view from justification to ownership. It makes visible which reaction stage a person or team is currently stuck on.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowMedium
Timedifferent
30–60 min per interview1-3 h20-45 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
1 participant per interview5-301-84-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Interview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasOwnership Reflection, Action Commitment, Coaching NotesAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
ResponsibilityLeadershipTeam
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods