🧠 Knowledge Base

Empathy Mapping: Visualising the User Mindset

Focus
  • Identity & Belonging, Narrative & Meaning, Technology & Culture
Category
  • Framework
Lens
  • Behavioural

Explanation

What it is

An empathy map is a visual framework that helps teams step into the user’s world by mapping what they say, think, do, and feel. It turns qualitative research data into a shared, human-centred snapshot that guides product and design decisions.

When to use it

  • At the start of a design sprint or discovery phase
  • When aligning teams around user insights before ideation
  • When refining personas or validating assumptions about user behaviour

Why it matters

  • Empathy maps externalise what’s often invisible — the inner experience of users.
  • By translating fragmented research into a holistic understanding of motivations and emotions, they foster empathy, reduce bias, and strengthen team alignment around real human needs rather than assumptions.

Reference

Definitions

  • Empathy Map

    A collaborative visual framework used to articulate a user's experiences, emotions, and perceptions, typically organised into quadrants such as Says, Thinks, Does, and Feels.

  • User-Centred Design (UCD)

    A design philosophy and process that prioritises the needs, wants, and limitations of end users at every stage of product development.

  • Persona

    A semi-fictional representation of a user segment, grounded in qualitative and quantitative research, that captures shared behaviours, motivations, and pain points.

  • Archetype

    A broad, symbolic character model representing universal patterns of motivation or behaviour — often used for storytelling and brand strategy rather than data-driven design. (Commonly mistaken for a persona, but not grounded in empirical research.)

  • Qualitative Research

    Exploratory research focused on understanding human behaviour and reasoning through methods like interviews, observation, and open-ended surveys.

  • Design Thinking

    A problem-solving framework that emphasises empathy, ideation, prototyping, and testing to create user-centred innovations.

Notes & caveats

  • Empathy maps are not a replacement for research — they synthesise data already gathered.
  • Over-generalisation can lead to stereotype-driven personas; validation is essential.
  • The framework should evolve as new data emerges — treat it as a living document.
  • Different teams may adapt quadrant labels (adding Sees and Hears) to fit specific contexts.

How To

Objective

To create an empathy map that captures authentic user insights and aligns the team around a shared understanding of user experiences, motivations, and challenges.

Steps

  1. Define the user
    Select a clear, representative persona or scenario.
  2. Gather insights
    Compile qualitative data from interviews, field studies, or usability tests.
  3. Prepare the map
    Divide into Says, Thinks, Does, Feels, Sees, and Hears.
  4. Populate collaboratively
    Use one note per insight; avoid assumptions.
  5. Synthesise and cluster
    Group themes to reveal tensions and opportunities.
  6. Discuss implications
    Reframe findings into design opportunities.
  7. Iterate and validate
    Update as new evidence appears.

Tips

  • Colour-code by data source.
  • Use verbatim quotes to preserve authenticity.
  • Keep visible in shared workspaces.

Pitfalls

Using assumptions instead of evidence

Ground every insight in data.

Treating the map as a one-off deliverable

Revisit regularly.

Focusing only on actions

Capture thoughts and emotions too.

Overcomplicating structure

Expand only when clarity improves.

Acceptance criteria

  • All quadrants are evidence-based.
  • Consensus reached on needs and pain points.
  • Map is version-controlled and accessible.

Tutorial

Scenario

A cross-functional product team at a digital bank is preparing for a redesign of its budgeting app. Research interviews reveal that users struggle to trust automated spending insights. The UX researcher leads a 90-minute empathy-mapping workshop to synthesise findings and align design priorities.

Walkthrough

Decision point
Input/Output
Actions
Error handling
Closure

The team must decide whether to begin ideation or first deepen their understanding of user emotions around financial trust. They choose to run an empathy-mapping session to externalise the research data.

Input
Transcripts and notes from five user interviews, observation notes from usability sessions, and screenshots of the current app.

Output
A completed empathy map highlighting emotional friction points (fear of mis-categorisation, anxiety about control loss) and new opportunity areas (reassurance through transparency cues).

  1. Define the user
    The facilitator introduces “Lena,” a mid-thirties professional who uses the budgeting tool weekly but distrusts auto-categorised data.
  2. Gather insights
    The researcher extracts verbatim quotes (“I’m not sure if it’s right,” “I always double-check manually”) and behavioural notes.
  3. Prepare the map
    On a shared Miro board, six quadrants are drawn: Says, Thinks, Does, Feels, Sees, and Hears.
  4. Populate collaboratively
    Each participant adds one insight per sticky. Developers highlight “Does” items; marketers focus on “Hears” (ads, peers).
  5. Synthesise and cluster
    Similar themes are grouped, revealing a strong tension between automation convenience and control reassurance.
  6. Discuss implications
    The group reframes the design goal: instead of “make it smarter,” they pivot to “make it trustworthy.”
  7. Iterate and validate
    They plan to test the revised concept in upcoming interviews, updating the empathy map as new data arrives.

If discussions drift into solution mode too early, the facilitator pauses and redirects the group to evidence-based synthesis. If conflicting interpretations arise, they tag the uncertainty for follow-up research rather than forcing consensus.

The updated empathy map is stored in the shared workspace with version control. A short reflection note summarises the main insight: “Trust issues stem not from data accuracy but from emotional transparency.” The team uses this to brief their next design sprint.

Result

  • Before
    Fragmented user insights, no shared emotional understanding.
  • After
    Unified team empathy, clearer design direction, and a living map to anchor further research.
  • Artefact Snapshot
    📁 Empathy Map v1.0 – “Lena’s Trust Journey” (Miro Board, shared under Research → Discovery → Empathy Maps)

Variations

  • If time-boxed to ≤45 minutes, limit quadrants to Says–Thinks–Does–Feels.
  • For remote sessions, use collaborative digital tools (Miro, FigJam) with colour-coded ownership.
  • If participant availability is low, the researcher can pre-populate notes and validate asynchronously.