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 a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Paper illustration of DIBB with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
DIBB
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Purposedifferent
When several options collide with several criteria, comparison quickly becomes subjective. A Decision Matrix makes the trade-off visible and brings weighting, criteria, and options into a shared logic.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.DIBB helps clarify target groups, value, goals, and priorities by making the logic behind a decision explicit. It captures results as a DIBB document, belief list, bet list, and learning report.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
45-90 min45–90 min1-2 h30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
2-83-102-84-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasDIBB document, Belief list, Bet list, Learning reportEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
StrategyDecisionAssumptionsHypothesis
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods