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
Paper illustration of two considered options leading to a decision record with a marked status and visible consequences.
Architecture
Architecture Decision Record
EventStorming on a long working surface: colored event cards form a business flow, friction points are marked, and a boundary separates different areas of responsibility.
Domain Modeling
EventStorming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Purposedifferent
An ADR permanently records an architecture decision with context, trade-offs, and consequence. It creates continuity for later changes because the decision path stays traceable.When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views.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 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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
15-45 min2-8 h30–60 min45–90 min
Participantsdifferent
1-35-124-83-10
Formatdifferent
AsyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
ADR File, Decision Log, RationaleEvent Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open QuestionsEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas
Tagsno overlap
ArchitectureRationaleDocumentationGovernance
Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
Add more methods