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 the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.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 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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h45–90 min60-90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
5-303-104-104-8
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Consensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods