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 KPI Tree with its method-specific working model.
Product Strategy
KPI Tree
Paper illustration for Alignment Mapping.
Facilitation
Alignment Mapping
Paper illustration of HEART Framework with its method-specific working model.
UX Research
HEART Framework
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 metrics across the organization drift apart, it arranges drivers and effects under one shared logic. It connects customer value, product logic, and decision priorities. The result is captured as a KPI tree and owner list.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.Helps clarify observations, needs, and patterns in concrete terms. It groups observations into patterns, questions, and decisions. The result is captured as a HEART-GSM table and dashboard.
Complexitysame
MediumMediumMediumMedium
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage90-180 min initial, dann laufend1-2 h120 min initial, dann laufend
Participantsdifferent
10-503-84-123-6
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop + async
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesKPI Tree, Owner ListAlignment Map, Open Issues, Decision QuestionsHEART-GSM Table, Dashboard
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
MetricsStrategyAlignmentMeasurement
AlignmentStakeholdersStrategyFacilitation
MetricsUX researchMeasurementSatisfaction
Add more methods