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
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration for Argument Mapping
Decision Making
Argument Mapping
Red Teaming method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Red Teaming
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
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 statements, evidence, and counterarguments get mixed up, a debate quickly loses its structure. Argument Mapping breaks a thesis down into its reasoning and makes visible what it really rests on.For strategic decisions with high reach, agreement and gut feeling are often not enough. Red teaming brings deliberate opposition into the situation and tests where a plan breaks under real counterarguments.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowMediumHighLow
Timedifferent
30–60 min1-3 h1-4 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-81-83-84-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsArgument Map, Evidence Gaps, Decision RationaleChallenge Findings, Risk Register, Mitigation PlanProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
SensemakingDecisionRationale
RiskDecisionSensemaking
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods