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 Dot Voting |  Innovation Brainwriting |  Facilitation Mind 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 workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection. | When loud voices or hierarchy distort the idea search, the method creates a quiet entry into joint development. It gives everyone thinking space and gathers contributions without social brakes, making diversity more visible and easier to build on. | When a topic is still unclear and too many thoughts surface at once, Mind Mapping creates an open surface for ordering them. It makes connections, subtopics, and starting points visible without fixing them too early. |
Complexitysame | Low | Low | Low | Low |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 5-15 min | 15-30 min | 15-45 min |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 3-20 | 3-12 | 1-10 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Ranked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist | Idea sheets, Expanded concepts, Prioritized list | Mind Map, Topic Clusters, Open Questions |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization | BrainstormingCollaborationInclusionIdeas | BrainstormingIdeasMappingStructureFacilitation |