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 Consensus Workshop |  Innovation Design Charrette |  Facilitation Problem Framing Workshop |
|---|---|---|---|---|
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. | In a tightly timed design process with many participants, the method pools several lines of thinking in a short time. It brings parallel design energy without letting the discussion tip into endless coordination. This quickly produces solid directions for architecture or space. | When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Medium | Medium | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 1-3 h | Halber Tag bis mehrere Tage | 60-120 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 5-30 | 10-50 | 4-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas | Sketches and Concepts, Consolidated Solution Sketch, Prioritized Direction | Problem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis Questions |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment | BrainstormingWorkshopCollaborationIdeation | FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery |