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 Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Paper illustration for DACI
Decision Making
DACI
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.An RFC clarifies architecture context, options, and consequences. It structures technical context, alternatives, tradeoffs, open questions, and review feedback, and captures the result as an RFC document, reviewer comments, and a decision rationale.In cross-functional decisions, responsibilities quickly blur between approval, influence, and execution. DACI arranges these roles so decision pressure, contribution, and information stay cleanly separated.
Complexitydifferent
LowLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
30–60 min60-90 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung30-60 min
Participantsdifferent
4-84-103-20 Reviewer2-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopAsyncWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsDACI Matrix, Decision Owner, Decision Log
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
DecisionRolesGovernanceAlignment
Add more methods