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
Decision Tree method illustration showing its working structure
Decision Making
Decision Tree
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
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.For decisions with follow-on paths and dependencies, a linear comparison is often not enough. A Decision Tree shows how options branch under conditions and which consequences hang on each branch.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.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
30–60 min60-90 min30-90 min45–90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-84-101-63-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentDecision Tree, Option Map, Assumption ListTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
DecisionTreeOptions
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
Add more methods