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 a JTBD interview notebook with a decision timeline, forces of change and a concise job hypothesis.
Product Discovery
Jobs to Be Done
EventStorming on a long working surface: colored event cards form a business flow, friction points are marked, and a boundary separates different areas of responsibility.
Domain Modeling
EventStorming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy Mapping
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Purposedifferent
When switching motives and progress are unclear, it reconstructs the situation from real customer circumstances. It shows why a switch happens and what kind of progress is being sought.When a domain consists of many events, rules, and states, it creates a shared modeling space for the team. It bundles language, flows, and boundaries before domain knowledge fragments into siloed views.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 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
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-3 Wochen2-8 h30–60 min45–90 min
Participantsdifferent
5-12 Interviews5-124-83-10
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Job Stories, Outcome Statements, Opportunity ListEvent Timeline, Ubiquitous Language, Boundaries, Open QuestionsEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research GapsTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areas
Tagsno overlap
CustomerOutcomesNeeds
Domain-Driven DesignEventsDiscoveryWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
Add more methods