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
Paper illustration of Goal Question Metric with its method-specific working model.
Engineering
Goal Question Metric
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of HEART Framework with its method-specific working model.
UX Research
HEART Framework
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Purposedifferent
Helps clarify technical problems, hypotheses, and next steps in concrete terms. It breaks a technical problem into testable parts. The result is captured as a GQM table and metric briefs.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.Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard.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
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
90-180 min30–60 min120 min initial, dann laufend1-3 h
Participantsdifferent
3-64-83-65-30
Formatdifferent
WorkshopWorkshopWorkshop + asyncWorkshop
Outputdifferent
GQM Table, Metric ProfilesEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsHEART-GSM Table, DashboardConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority Areas
Tagsno overlap
MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
Add more methods