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 Request for Comments (RFC) with its method-specific working model.
Architecture
Request for Comments
Software Architecture Canvas method illustration showing its working structure
Architecture
Software Architecture Canvas
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.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.The Software Architecture Canvas reduces a system to the most important architecture decisions, constraints, and interfaces. It is useful when teams need a resilient overall picture quickly.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
LowMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
30–60 min1-3 Wochen vom Draft bis zur Entscheidung1-2 h45–90 min
Participantsdifferent
4-83-20 Reviewer3-103-10
Formatdifferent
WorkshopAsyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Empathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsRFC document, Reviewer comments, Decision rationale, Follow-up ADR or ticketsArchitecture Canvas, Goals, Constraints, Quality AttributesTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas
Tagsno overlap
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
ArchitectureDecisionAsyncGovernance
CanvasArchitectureAlignmentWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
Add more methods