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 Lightning Decision Jam working structure.
Facilitation
Decision Jam
Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
Empathy Mapping
UX Research
Empathy 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 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.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.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.
Complexitydifferent
MediumLowLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage60-90 min45–90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
10-504-103-104-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentTheme clusters, Insight statements, Opportunity areasEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeRoot cause
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods