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 Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Purposedifferent
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.When loud voices could dominate a round, Nominal Group Technique protects individual thinking time from group effects. It collects ideas separately first and only then enables shared weighting.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMedium
Timedifferent
60-90 min30–60 min60-120 min
Participantsdifferent
4-104-85-12
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsRanked Ideas, Clarified Options, Group Priority
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationPrioritizationVotingInclusion
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Paper illustration for 1-2-4-All.
Facilitation
1-2-4-All
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop