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 for Opportunity Interview
Product Discovery
Opportunity Interview
Paper illustration for Problem Framing Workshop.
Facilitation
Problem Framing Workshop
Paper illustration of shared options, independently placed voting dots, and a highlighted shortlist.
Facilitation
Dot Voting
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 opportunities are still hidden behind signals of need, it structures conversations around needs and obstacles. It looks for patterns that lead to new product opportunities.When a team works on symptoms but the real question stays fuzzy, a Problem Framing Workshop sharpens the view of the right problem. It separates observation, interpretation, and target picture from each other.When a workshop has produced too many options and the group needs to condense quickly, dot voting makes preferences visible in a short time. It bundles individual votes into a solid signal for the next selection.
Complexitydifferent
MediumMediumLowLow
Timedifferent
1-2 Tage30-60 min je Interview60-120 min5-15 min
Participantsdifferent
10-505-12 Interviews4-103-20
Formatdifferent
Workshop + asyncWorkshop + asyncWorkshopWorkshop
Outputdifferent
Kano Matrix, Feature Classes, Priority ThemesInterview Notes, Opportunity Themes, Customer QuotesProblem Statement, Scope Boundaries, Assumption List, Next Analysis QuestionsRanked list, Consensus signal, Shortlist
Tagsno overlap
SatisfactionPrioritizationCustomer
DiscoveryInterviewsOpportunityCustomer
FacilitationAlignmentDiscovery
FacilitationVotingConsensusPrioritization
Add more methods