methodatlas
Compare

View methods side by side.

Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.

Criterion
A3 Problem-Solving workspace showing the question, observations, and next decision.
Operations
A3 Problem Solving
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
For a complex deviation with several people involved, the method bundles problem, analysis, and decision onto one page. It creates a shared working space where causes, countermeasures, and follow-up fit together.When a lot is assumed about a target group but little is seen jointly, empathy mapping makes knowledge and gaps directly comparable. The picture also shows which assumptions hold up and where evidence is missing.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 decision is stuck, Decision Jam loosens the knot through structured separation of problem, idea, and selection. The format creates movement without jumping prematurely at the first seemingly elegant answer.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
45-90 min30–60 min30–60 min per interview60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-54-81 participant per interview4-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
A3 Report, Action Plan, Root Cause AnalysisEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
LeanProblem solvingCoachingOperations
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods