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 Problem Framing Workshop |  UX Research Affinity Diagramming |  Facilitation Consensus 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 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. | When research notes, feedback, or observations sit unconnected side by side, affinity diagramming sorts the raw material into solid themes. Many individual points turn into patterns that make decisions and opportunities clearer. | 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. |
Complexitydifferent | Low | Low | Low | Medium |
Timedifferent | 30–60 min per interview | 60-120 min | 45–90 min | 1-3 h |
Participantsdifferent | 1 participant per interview | 4-10 | 3-10 | 5-30 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop | Workshop |
Outputdifferent | Interview Notes, Themes, Insight Summary | Problem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis Questions | Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas | Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas |
Tagsno overlap | QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery | FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery | SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause | FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment |