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
Paper illustration of two people facing each other, speech bubbles and an open interview notebook.
UX Research
User Interviews
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
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 teams derive needs only from assumptions and real motives are missing, user interviews give direct access to behavior and meaning. Conversations from the target group's everyday life make patterns, tensions, and open questions solidly visible.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 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.
Complexitysame
LowLowLowLow
Timedifferent
60-90 min30–60 min per interview45–90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
4-101 participant per interview3-104-8
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Problem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentInterview Notes, Themes, Insight SummaryTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
QualitativeResearchCustomerDiscovery
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods