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
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Paper illustration of Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
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.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.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 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
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
45–90 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung30–60 min60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
3-103-20 Reviewer4-84-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods