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 HEART Framework with its method-specific working model.
UX Research
HEART Framework
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of Goal Question Metric with its method-specific working model.
Engineering
Goal Question Metric
Purposedifferent
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 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 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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumMedium
Timedifferent
120 min initial, dann laufend30–60 min1-3 h90-180 min
Participantsdifferent
3-64-85-303-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
HEART-GSM Table, DashboardEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasGQM Table, Metric Profiles
Tagsno overlap
MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
MetricsMeasurementEngineeringAlignment
Add more methods