Compare

View methods side by side.

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

Selected:Affinity Diagramming Smoke Test ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)Assumption Mapping

Criterion	UX Research Affinity Diagramming	Product Discovery Smoke Test	Architecture ATAM (Architecture Tradeoff Analysis Method)	Product Discovery Assumption Mapping
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.	When demand only needs to be roughly verified, it tests interest with minimal effort. It measures whether people would take a next step at all.	ATAM helps teams weigh architecture decisions when quality goals compete. The team considers business goals, stakeholder expectations, and technical decisions together. The evaluation shows which risks need further investigation.	When assumptions still sit unordered in the room, it weighs uncertainty against leverage. It makes visible which hypotheses should be checked first.
Complexitydifferent	Low	Low	High	Medium
Timedifferent	45–90 min	1-5 Tage	Several meetings plus preparation and analysis; total effort depends on scope	45-60 min
Participantsdifferent	3-10	Nutzertraffic	Evaluation team, architects, and relevant stakeholders	2-8
Formatdifferent	Workshop	Async	Workshop + async	Workshop + async
Outputdifferent	Theme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas	Interest Metrics, Conversion Signal, Learning Note	Prioritized quality scenarios in a utility tree, Architecture risks with reasoning and assumptions, Sensitivity and trade-off points, Findings report with open investigations	Assumption map, Test backlog, Risk ranking
Tagsno overlap	SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause	ValidationExperimentsDemandGrowth	ArchitectureQualityRiskTradeoffsStakeholders	AssumptionsRiskExperimentsValidation

Add more methods