Empathy Maps: The Research Tool That Actually Gets Your Team to Understand Users

Empathy maps turn messy user research into a one-page visual that your entire team can actually use. No jargon. No theoretical frameworks. Just a practical tool that forces everyone to see your users as real people with real problems.

I’ve facilitated over 100 design sprints and research workshops in the past 20 years. The empathy map is one of three tools I use in almost every project. Not because it’s trendy. Because it works.

This guide covers everything you need to know about empathy maps. What they are, when to use them instead of personas, how to create one properly, and how to use them to bridge the gap between designers, stakeholders, and developers.

What Is an Empathy Map?

An empathy map is a collaborative visualization tool that captures what you know about a specific user type. It organizes research insights into four quadrants: what the user Says, Thinks, Does, and Feels.

The result is a single-page overview that creates shared understanding across your team.

Here’s what makes empathy maps different from other research tools:

Speed. You can create one in 30-60 minutes with your team.

Accessibility. Non-designers can contribute and understand it immediately.

Actionability. It surfaces contradictions between what users say vs what they do. That’s where your best insights live.

The format was created by Dave Gray at XPLANE (later acquired by Dachis Group) as part of their Gamestorming toolkit. It’s been refined over the years, but the core structure remains the same because it works.

The Four Quadrants

Every empathy map divides into four sections:

Says: Direct quotes from user interviews, support tickets, reviews, or research sessions. Actual words users spoke or wrote.

Thinks: Internal thoughts that users don’t always verbalize. Their concerns, assumptions, and mental models. Sometimes these align with what they say. Often they don’t.

Does: Observable behaviors. What they click. How they navigate. Where they struggle. What they skip.

Feels: Emotional states throughout their experience. Frustration. Confusion. Delight. Anxiety.

Some versions add two more sections at the bottom:

Pains: Obstacles, frustrations, and challenges the user faces.

Gains: Goals, desires, and what success looks like for them.

I use the six-quadrant version for most projects. The Pains and Gains sections force you to synthesize the four quadrants into actionable insights.

When to Use Empathy Maps vs Personas

Both tools help you understand users. They serve different purposes.

Use empathy maps when you need to:

• Quickly synthesize research findings with your team
• Create shared understanding before a design sprint or workshop
• Bridge the gap between different departments
• Force your team to see users as real people instead of demographics
• Surface contradictions between stated needs and actual behavior

Use personas when you need to:

• Maintain consistent user understanding across long-term projects
• Communicate user types to new team members or stakeholders
• Make decisions between competing user needs
• Reference user context throughout the product development cycle

The practical difference: Empathy maps are workshop tools. Personas are reference documents.

I typically create empathy maps first during research synthesis. If the project needs ongoing user reference, I’ll develop personas afterward. The empathy mapping process makes persona creation much faster because you’ve already organized the research.

Why Empathy Maps Beat Starting with Personas

Most teams jump straight to personas. That’s backwards.

Personas require you to decide which user segments matter most before you’ve properly analyzed your research. You’re making segmentation decisions based on assumptions.

Empathy maps let you explore the research first. You discover natural patterns. You see which user types actually behave differently. Then you can create personas based on real insight instead of demographic guesswork.

I’ve seen teams create 5-7 personas that all behave the same way. Different job titles, different ages, same needs and behaviors. That’s useless.

Start with empathy maps for each potential user type. If two maps look nearly identical, you don’t need separate personas. If they diverge significantly, you’ve found real segments worth documenting.

How to Create an Empathy Map: Step-by-Step

Creating an empathy map is a team activity. You need multiple perspectives to catch patterns and challenge assumptions.

Here’s the process I use in every workshop:

1. Choose Your User Type

Be specific about who you’re mapping.

Bad: “Our customers” Good: “E-commerce managers at €2M-€10M stores who handle conversion optimization without a dedicated UX team”

If you have multiple user types, create separate maps. Don’t try to combine different users into one map. You’ll end up with a useless average.

2. Gather Your Research

You can’t create an empathy map from assumptions. You need real data.

Pull from:

• User interview transcripts
• Customer support tickets
• Sales call recordings
• Usability testing sessions
• Analytics data
• Customer reviews
• Survey responses
• Social media feedback

I typically print relevant quotes and data points on sticky notes before the workshop starts. This speeds up the mapping process and keeps discussions grounded in evidence.

3. Set Up the Template

Draw (or print) a large four-quadrant grid. Label each section: Says, Thinks, Does, Feels.

Add the user type description at the top.

If using the six-quadrant version, add Pains and Gains sections at the bottom.

Physical workshops work best. Digital tools like Miro or FigJam work for remote teams, but you lose some of the collaborative energy.

4. Populate Each Quadrant

Start with “Says” because it’s the most concrete. Pull direct quotes from your research. Verbatim. Don’t paraphrase yet.

Move to “Does” next. Add observable behaviors from analytics, session recordings, or testing.

Then tackle “Thinks” and “Feels.” These require more interpretation, which is why you saved them for last. Use the Says and Does quadrants as evidence to infer internal states.

Group similar items together as you work. You’ll start to see patterns.

5. Identify Pains and Gains

Look across all four quadrants. What obstacles keep appearing? Those are Pains.

What outcomes does the user want? Those are Gains.

This is where the synthesis happens. You’re distilling 50+ sticky notes into 5-8 core insights.

6. Review and Refine

Step back. Read the entire map out loud.

Ask:

• Does this feel like a real person?
• Are there contradictions between quadrants? (Good. That’s insight.)
• What’s missing that we know from research?
• What’s assumption vs evidence?

Refine until the map accurately represents your research findings.

Using Empathy Maps to Bridge the Designer-Stakeholder Gap

This is where empathy maps deliver the most value.

Designers live in user research. They’ve done the interviews, watched the session recordings, analyzed the data.

Stakeholders live in business metrics, roadmaps, and competing priorities. They want to support good UX, but they don’t have the same depth of user understanding.

That gap creates friction.

Stakeholders push for features users didn’t ask for. Designers push back without explaining the user impact. Projects stall.

Empathy maps solve this by creating shared understanding in 60 minutes.

How I Use Empathy Maps in Stakeholder Workshops

When starting a new UX audit or research project, I run a 90-minute empathy mapping workshop with the full team. Designers, product managers, developers, marketing, and executives.

I present the research findings first. 15-20 minutes of key quotes, behavioral data, and patterns.

Then we build the empathy map together as a group.

This does three things:

Forces stakeholders to engage with actual user data instead of discussing features in abstract terms.

Surfaces misalignment early. When the CMO thinks users care about brand story and the data shows they only care about product specs, we address that disconnect immediately.

Creates buy-in for design decisions. When stakeholders helped create the empathy map, they understand why you’re prioritizing certain UX improvements. You’re solving pains they identified.

I’ve used this approach with ADIDAS, KLM, and dozens of e-commerce companies. It consistently shortens the alignment phase from weeks to hours.

The Stakeholder-Specific Empathy Map

Sometimes you need to map your internal stakeholders, not just your users.

I wrote a separate article about stakeholder empathy maps because this technique deserves its own deep dive.

The short version: You can use the same empathy map format to understand what your stakeholders care about, what they’re measured on, and what pains they’re trying to solve.

This is particularly valuable when you need to present research findings or convince executives to invest in UX improvements. You’re not just showing user needs. You’re connecting user needs to stakeholder goals.

Real Examples from 20 Years of UX Work

Theory is useless without application. Here are three real empathy maps from actual projects, with identifying details changed.

Example 1: Dutch Fashion E-commerce Manager

Says:

• “We’re losing customers at checkout but I don’t know why”
• “Google Analytics shows the traffic but not the problems”
• “I can’t afford to hire a full-time UX designer”
• “Every agency wants a 6-month project for €50K+”

Thinks:

• Worried the site looks outdated compared to competitors
• Suspects mobile checkout is broken but can’t prove it
• Wants quick wins to show the CEO UX investment works
• Assumes good UX requires big budgets and long timelines

Does:

• Checks conversion rates daily
• Makes design changes based on competitor sites
• Runs A/B tests without research hypothesis
• Searches for “checkout optimization tips” and implements generic advice

Feels:

• Frustrated by lack of design resources
• Pressured to improve metrics without tools or support
• Anxious about European Accessibility Act compliance
• Excited when small changes move the needle

Pains:

• No design budget or team
• Cart abandonment at 72% (above industry average)
• Mobile conversion 40% lower than desktop
• CEO questions marketing ROI

Gains:

• Prove UX investment delivers measurable results
• Reduce cart abandonment by 10-15%
• Meet accessibility requirements before deadline
• Build case for proper UX budget next year

This empathy map led to creating the QuickScan offer. 30-minute recorded teardown, 48-hour delivery, specific action items. Solves the exact pains this user type faces.

Example 2: SaaS Product Manager (B2B Software)

Says:

• “Users say they want feature X but nobody uses it when we ship it”
• “Sales keeps promising custom features we can’t build”
• “Our onboarding completion rate is 34%”
• “Churn happens in the first 30 days or not at all”

Thinks:

• Suspects users don’t understand the product’s actual value
• Worried about feature bloat
• Believes better onboarding would solve retention
• Wants data-driven prioritization instead of HiPPO decisions

Does:

• Reviews Mixpanel funnels weekly
• Reads every support ticket tagged “confusion” or “how do I”
• Watches session recordings of failed onboarding
• Argues with sales about feature requests

Feels:

• Overwhelmed by competing priorities
• Confident in product vision but unsure about execution
• Frustrated when users don’t “get it”
• Validated when retention data improves

Pains:

• High churn in first 30 days
• No clarity on which features drive retention
• Sales and product misalignment
• Users abandon during onboarding

Gains:

• Increase 30-day retention to 60%+
• Get users to activation moment faster
• Align roadmap with actual user behavior
• Reduce support tickets about basic features

This map revealed the real problem wasn’t missing features. It was activation. We ran a design sprint focused entirely on getting users to their first “aha moment” within 5 minutes instead of 45. Retention jumped 23%.

Example 3: E-commerce Customer (End User)

Says:

• “I’ll buy it if I can find it in my size”
• “Does this site have free returns?”
• “I’m just browsing”
• “Let me check reviews first”

Thinks:

• Skeptical about product photos matching reality
• Worried about fit/size
• Comparing prices across 3-4 sites
• Not sure if they actually need this product

Does:

• Opens 8-12 tabs from Google Shopping
• Reads 3-5 reviews before any purchase
• Abandons cart to “think about it”
• Searches for discount codes before checkout
• Checks return policy before adding to cart

Feels:

• Anxious about making wrong purchase decision
• Frustrated by unclear sizing information
• Overwhelmed by too many product options
• Delighted by free shipping and easy returns

Pains:

• Uncertainty about fit/size
• Hidden costs at checkout
• Complicated return processes
• Too many choices without clear differentiation

Gains:

• Find the right product quickly
• Confidence the product will match expectations
• Easy return if it doesn’t work out
• Best price without spending 30 minutes comparing

This map led to three UX changes that increased conversion by 18%:

1. Size guide with real measurements, not just S/M/L
2. “Free returns within 30 days” badge on product pages
3. “Price match guarantee” on checkout

All three addressed specific pains from the empathy map.

Common Empathy Mapping Mistakes

I’ve facilitated over 100 empathy mapping workshops. Here are the mistakes I see teams make repeatedly:

Mistake 1: Building Empathy Maps from Assumptions

If you haven’t done research, don’t make an empathy map. You’re just documenting your team’s biases.

I’ve sat through workshops where teams spent an hour filling a map with “I think users probably…” statements. That’s fiction, not insight.

Do interviews first. Even 5-8 interviews will give you enough material for a useful empathy map.

Mistake 2: Trying to Map Multiple User Types on One Map

“Let’s create an empathy map for all our customers.”

No.

Your 25-year-old impulse shopper and your 55-year-old repeat customer have different Says/Thinks/Does/Feels. Combining them creates a useless average.

Make separate maps for distinct user types. If you’re not sure whether two users are different enough, make both maps and compare. If they’re nearly identical, merge them.

Mistake 3: Skipping the Contradictions

The most valuable insights come from contradictions.

Users say they care about sustainability but buy the cheapest option. Users say they read reviews but analytics show they skip the reviews section. Users say they want more features but don’t use the ones you have.

These contradictions tell you what actually drives behavior vs what users think sounds good in interviews.

Don’t smooth them over. Highlight them.

Mistake 4: Creating a Map and Never Using It

Empathy maps aren’t decorative.

After creating the map:

• Use it to prioritize UX improvements (which pains hurt most?)
• Reference it during design reviews (does this solve a real pain?)
• Show it to new team members during onboarding
• Update it when you do new research

If your empathy map lives in a desk drawer or a Miro board nobody revisits, you wasted time.

Mistake 5: Confusing “Thinks” with “Feels”

“Thinks” is cognitive. The user’s mental models, assumptions, and beliefs.

“Feels” is emotional. Frustrated. Anxious. Confident. Delighted.

Bad Think: “Frustrated by the checkout process” Good Think: “Believes checkout should take less than 2 minutes” Good Feel: “Frustrated by the checkout process”

Keep them separate. The distinction matters.

Empathy Map Templates and Tools

You don’t need fancy tools. A whiteboard and sticky notes work perfectly.

But if you want templates:

Physical workshops: Print a large-format empathy map template. I use A0 size (roughly 33” x 47”). Stick it on the wall. Use 3” x 3” sticky notes in different colors for each quadrant.

Remote workshops:

• Miro has built-in empathy map templates
• FigJam works well for real-time collaboration
• MURAL has good empathy mapping features

I’m a Miro Expert (one of 12 in the Netherlands), so most of my remote workshops use Miro. But the tool doesn’t matter. The process does.

Downloadable template: I created a template you can use. It’s the same format I use with clients like ADIDAS and KLM. Download the BTNG Empathy Map Template and adapt it to your needs.

How Empathy Maps Fit Into the Broader UX Research Process

Empathy maps are one tool in a larger research toolkit.

Here’s how they fit into a typical UX research project:

Research: Conduct user interviews, analyze analytics, review support tickets, run usability tests.

Synthesis: Create empathy maps to organize findings and create shared understanding.

Definition: Use empathy maps to inform personas (if needed), journey maps, and problem statements.

Ideation: Reference empathy maps during design sprints or brainstorming to stay grounded in user needs.

Validation: Return to empathy maps after prototyping or testing to confirm you solved the right pains.

I typically create empathy maps during the synthesis phase. After research, before major design decisions.

They help teams transition from “here’s what we learned” to “here’s what we should do about it.”

Next Steps: Start with Real Research

Empathy maps are powerful when built on real user research. Useless when built on assumptions.

If you need help running proper UX research for your e-commerce store, I offer two options:

QuickScan: 30-minute recorded teardown of your site, delivered in 48 hours. I’ll identify the top 5-7 conversion problems and tell you exactly how to fix them. No 6-month project required.

Complete UX Audit: Full research engagement with user interviews, analytics analysis, and usability testing. Includes empathy maps, journey maps, and a prioritized roadmap of UX improvements.

Both options are designed for e-commerce teams who need real insights fast, not theoretical frameworks that take months to implement.

Book a 15-minute call and I’ll tell you which option makes sense for your store.

Or start with 15 UX Mistakes Killing Your E-commerce Conversion Rate, a free guide based on 20 years of conversion optimization work.

Related Articles

Want to go deeper on specific empathy mapping applications?

• Stakeholder Empathy Maps: Because Guessing What Users Want Is So Last Year - How to use empathy maps to understand internal stakeholders, not just users
• The Complete Guide to UX Research - The full research process, including where empathy maps fit
• How to Use UX Research Services Effectively - Getting maximum value from research investments

Empathy maps aren’t magic. They’re just a structured way to organize what you learned about users and make sure your entire team understands it.

Use them well.

Prefer to have this done for you? Our UX research service handles recruitment, facilitation, and synthesis.

---

What to read next

Empathy maps are one tool for organising what you learn. The quality of the underlying research determines how useful they are.

• The Most Common UX Research Methods - which methods generate the insights that empathy maps synthesise
• How to Recruit Research Participants - the participants whose input goes into your empathy maps