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 of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Paper illustration of a decision table with criteria rows, weighted ratings, and a narrowly leading alternative.
Decision Making
Decision Matrix
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
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 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 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 a group needs a solid decision without outvoting individual factions, a Consensus Workshop creates a negotiable common ground. It makes agreement, reservations, and open tensions discussable at the same time.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
30–60 min60-90 min45-90 min1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
4-84-102-85-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentDecision Matrix, Scoring Rationale, Selected OptionConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
DecisionCriteriaScoringTradeoffs
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods