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
A paper-based illustration representing Kano Model with its core stages and visible working result.
Product Discovery
Kano Model
Paper illustration of the Consensus Workshop working structure.
Facilitation
Consensus Workshop
Paper illustration of Cost of Delay with its method-specific working model.
Delivery
Cost of Delay
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Purposedifferent
When features need to be distinguished by their effect on satisfaction, it makes expectations and surprises comparable. It separates basic needs, performance contribution, and delight.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 scope, order, and delivery flow in concrete terms. It makes work, constraints, and sequence manageable. The result is captured as a Cost of Delay table and prioritization sequence.When several people work toward one goal but hold different mental maps, Alignment Mapping makes the discrepancies visible. It arranges goals, assumptions, and priorities so shared direction becomes verifiable.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumHighMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage1-3 h90-180 min1-2 h
Participantsdifferent
10-505-303-84-12
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesConsensus Clusters, Theme Titles, Priority AreasCoD Table, Prioritization SequenceAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision Questions
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
FacilitationConsensusWorkshopAlignment
PrioritizationDeliveryEconomicsDecision
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
Add more methods