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 an IBIS map with issues, positions and arguments
Knowledge Modeling
IBIS
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of the Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Purposedifferent
IBIS structures thinking about complex questions as a sequence of issues, ideas, and arguments. The method keeps discussions open without forcing them into premature consensus.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowMediumLow
Timedifferent
1-3 h30–60 min1-3 h60-90 min
Participantsdifferent
2-84-85-304-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Issue Map, Positions, Argument NotesEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, Experiment
Tagsno overlap
RationaleKnowledgeDecision
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
Add more methods