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 shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Purposedifferent
When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.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
LowLowLow
Timedifferent
5-15 min45–90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
3-203-104-8
Formatsame
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Ranked list, Consensus signal, ShortlistTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
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
Independent contributions form an ordered group priority list.
Facilitation
Nominal Group Technique
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration for Pareto Analysis
Decision Making
Pareto Analysis