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 Decision Rights Mapping with its method-specific working model.
Decision Making
Decision Rights Mapping
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Purposedifferent
In organizations with many stakeholders, it often blurs who actually decides and who is merely consulted. It separates options, evaluation criteria, and open risks. The result is captured as a Decision Rights matrix and an agreement.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLow
Timedifferent
90-180 min45–90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
4-123-104-8
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Decision Rights Matrix, AgreementTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
DecisionGovernanceAlignmentResponsibility
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods

Often compared together

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

Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for Kepner-Tregoe
Operations
Kepner-Tregoe