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
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 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
MediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage60-90 min30–60 min
Participantsdifferent
10-504-104-8
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesProblem Cluster, Prioritized Challenge, ExperimentEmpathy Map, Assumptions List, Research Gaps
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
FacilitationDecisionProblem solvingWorkshop
SynthesisQualitativeWorkshop
Add more methods

Often compared together

Methods with strong topical overlap with the current selection, not yet in the comparison.

Affinity Diagramming
UX Research
Affinity Diagramming
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 of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting